linux-kernel - Re: [Bug #11308] tbench regression on each kernel release from 2.6.22 -> 2.6.28

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0811180731480.18283@nehalem.linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Tue, 18 Nov 2008 07:58:49 -0800 (PST)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, mingo@...e.hu,
	dada1@...mosbay.com, rjw@...k.pl, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org, cl@...ux-foundation.org,
	efault@....de, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, shemminger@...tta.com
Subject: Re: [Bug #11308] tbench regression on each kernel release from 2.6.22
 -&gt; 2.6.28

On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, Nick Piggin wrote:

> On Tuesday 18 November 2008 07:58, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> > >
> > > Ok. It could easily be something like a cache footprint issue. And while
> > > I don't know my sparc cpu's very well, I think the Ultrasparc-IIIi is
> > > super- scalar but does no out-of-order and speculation, no?
> >
> > I does only very simple speculation, but you're description is accurate.
> 
> Surely it would do branch prediction, but maybe not indirect branch?

That would be "branch target prediction" (and a BTB - "Branch Target 
Buffer" to hold it), and no, I don't think Sparc does that. You can 
certainly do it for in-order machines too, but I think it's fairly rare.

It's sufficiently different from the regular "pick up the address from the 
static instruction stream, and also yank the kill-chain on mispredicted 
direction" to be real work to do. Unlike a compare or test instruction, 
it's not at all likely that you can resolve the final address in just a 
single pipeline stage, and without that, it's usually too late to yank the 
kill-chain.

(And perhaps equally importantly, indirect branches are relatively rare on 
old-style Unix benchmarks - ie SpecInt/FP - or in databases. So it's not 
something that Sparc would necessarily have spent the effort on.)

There is obviously one very special indirect jump: "ret". That's the one 
that is common, and that tends to have a special branch target buffer that 
is a pure stack. And for that, there is usually a special branch target 
register that needs to be set up 'x' cycles before the ret in order to 
avoid the stall (then the predition is checking that register against the 
branch target stack, which is somewhat akin to a regular conditional 
branch comparison).

So I strongly suspect that an indirect (non-ret) branch flushes the 
pipeline on sparc. It is possible that there is a "prepare to jump" 
instruction that prepares the indirect branch stack (kind of a "push 
prediction information"). I suspect Java sees a lot more indirect 
branches than traditional Unix loads, so maybe Sun did do that.

			Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/