lib/memcopy: use glibc version

the kernel's memcpy and memmove is very inefficient. But the glibc version is
quite fast, in some cases it is 10 times faster than the kernel version. So I
introduce some memory copy macros and functions of the glibc to improve the
kernel version's performance.

The strategy of the memory functions is:
1. Copy bytes until the destination pointer is aligned.
2. Copy words in unrolled loops.  If the source and destination are not
   aligned in the same way, use word memory operations, but shift and merge
   two read words before writing.
3. Copy the few remaining bytes.

Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox*******>
Signed-off-by: faux123 <reioux@gmail.com>
lib/string: use glibc version

the performance of memcpy and memmove of the general version is very
inefficient, this patch improved them.

Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox*******>
Signed-off-by: faux123 <reioux@gmail.com>
msm: krait: add CPU Voltage control.

Signed-off-by: Francisco Franco <franciscofranco.1990@gmail.com>
msm8974: Adapt memutils optimizations from msm8960pro

Preload farther to take advantage of the memory bus, and assume
64-byte cache lines.  Unroll some pairs of ldm/stm as well, for
unexplainable reasons.

Future enhancements should include,

- #define for how far to preload, possibly defined separately for
  memcpy, copy_*_user
- Tuning for misaligned buffers
- Tuning for memmove
- Tuning for small buffers
- Understanding mechanism behind ldm/stm unroll causing some gains
  in copy_to_user

BASELINE (msm8960pro):
======================================================================
memcpy 1000MB at 5MB       : took 808850 usec, bandwidth 1236.236 MB/s
copy_to_user 1000MB at 5MB : took 810071 usec, bandwidth 1234.234 MB/s
copy_from_user 1000MB at 5M: took 942926 usec, bandwidth 1060.060 MB/s
memmove 1000GB at 5MB      : took 848588 usec, bandwidth 1178.178 MB/s
copy_to_user 1000GB at 4kB : took 847916 usec, bandwidth 1179.179 MB/s
copy_from_user 1000GB at 4k: took 935113 usec, bandwidth 1069.069 MB/s
copy_page 1000GB at 4kB    : took 779459 usec, bandwidth 1282.282 MB/s

THIS PATCH:
======================================================================
memcpy 1000MB at 5MB       : took 346223 usec, bandwidth 2888.888 MB/s
copy_to_user 1000MB at 5MB : took 348084 usec, bandwidth 2872.872 MB/s
copy_from_user 1000MB at 5M: took 348176 usec, bandwidth 2872.872 MB/s
memmove 1000GB at 5MB      : took 348267 usec, bandwidth 2871.871 MB/s
copy_to_user 1000GB at 4kB : took 377018 usec, bandwidth 2652.652 MB/s
copy_from_user 1000GB at 4k: took 371829 usec, bandwidth 2689.689 MB/s
copy_page 1000GB at 4kB    : took 383763 usec, bandwidth 2605.605 MB/s

Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: franciscofranco <franciscofranco.1990@gmail.com>

Conflicts:
	arch/arm/mach-msm/Kconfig
	arch/arm/mach-msm/Makefile

Conflicts:

	arch/arm/mach-msm/Kconfig
arch: arm: lib: optimize memcpy for cortex-A15

The LDRD/STRD instruction is faster than LDM/STM on Cortex-A15.
Also optimized preload cache size for Cortex-A15.

Added USE_LDRDSTRD_OVER_LDMSTM to turn on LDRD/STRD optimization.
Added ARM_PLD_SIZE, default 32. Should set to 64 for Cortex-A15.

Bug 1185248

Signed-off-by: Chandler Zhang <chazhang@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Krishna Reddy <vdumpa@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
Apply arch: arm: lib: optimize memcpy for cortex-A15 to memutils
vfs: fix bad hashing of dentries

Josef Bacik found a performance regression between 3.2 and 3.10 and
narrowed it down to commit bfcfaa77bdf0 ("vfs: use 'unsigned long'
accesses for dcache name comparison and hashing"). He reports:

 "The test case is essentially

      for (i = 0; i < 1000000; i++)
              mkdir("a$i");

  On xfs on a fio card this goes at about 20k dir/sec with 3.2, and 12k
  dir/sec with 3.10.  This is because we spend waaaaay more time in
  __d_lookup on 3.10 than in 3.2.

  The new hashing function for strings is suboptimal for <
  sizeof(unsigned long) string names (and hell even > sizeof(unsigned
  long) string names that I've tested).  I broke out the old hashing
  function and the new one into a userspace helper to get real numbers
  and this is what I'm getting:

      Old hash table had 1000000 entries, 0 dupes, 0 max dupes
      New hash table had 12628 entries, 987372 dupes, 900 max dupes
      We had 11400 buckets with a p50 of 30 dupes, p90 of 240 dupes, p99 of 567 dupes for the new hash

  My test does the hash, and then does the d_hash into a integer pointer
  array the same size as the dentry hash table on my system, and then
  just increments the value at the address we got to see how many
  entries we overlap with.

  As you can see the old hash function ended up with all 1 million
  entries in their own bucket, whereas the new one they are only
  distributed among ~12.5k buckets, which is why we're using so much
  more CPU in __d_lookup".

The reason for this hash regression is two-fold:

 - On 64-bit architectures the down-mixing of the original 64-bit
   word-at-a-time hash into the final 32-bit hash value is very
   simplistic and suboptimal, and just adds the two 32-bit parts
   together.

   In particular, because there is no bit shuffling and the mixing
   boundary is also a byte boundary, similar character patterns in the
   low and high word easily end up just canceling each other out.

 - the old byte-at-a-time hash mixed each byte into the final hash as it
   hashed the path component name, resulting in the low bits of the hash
   generally being a good source of hash data.  That is not true for the
   word-at-a-time case, and the hash data is distributed among all the
   bits.

The fix is the same in both cases: do a better job of mixing the bits up
and using as much of the hash data as possible.  We already have the
"hash_32|64()" functions to do that.

Reported-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
Optimize memutils and KSM
msm: mdss: Add lcd notifier