[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5613CE1C.40806@c-s.fr>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 15:35:24 +0200
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
To: Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/25] powerpc/8xx: Save r3 all the time in DTLB miss
handler
Le 29/09/2015 00:07, Scott Wood a écrit :
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 06:50:29PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> We are spending between 40 and 160 cycles with a mean of 65 cycles in
>> the TLB handling routines (measured with mftbl) so make it more
>> simple althought it adds one instruction.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
> Does this just make it simpler or does it make it faster? What is the
> performance impact? Is the performance impact seen with or without
> CONFIG_8xx_CPU6 enabled? Without it, it looks like you're adding an
> mtspr/mfspr combo in order to replace one mfspr.
>
>
The performance impact is not noticeable. Theoritically it adds 1 cycle
on a mean of 65 cycles, that is 1.5%. Even in the worst case where we
spend around 10% of the time in TLB handling exceptions, that represents
only 0.15% of the total CPU time. So that's almost nothing.
Behind the fact to get in simpler, the main reason is because I need a
third register for the following patch in the set, otherwise I would
spend a more time saving and restoring CR several times.
Christophe
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists