[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <de95229a14614198894a8ce421c30d94@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2023 08:46:54 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Geert Uytterhoeven' <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Evan Green <evan@...osinc.com>
CC: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...osinc.com>,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>,
"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
Björn Töpel <bjorn@...osinc.com>,
Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>,
Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>,
Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@...nel.org>,
"linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
"Sia Jee Heng" <jeeheng.sia@...rfivetech.com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
Greentime Hu <greentime.hu@...ive.com>,
Simon Hosie <shosie@...osinc.com>,
Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
"Alexandre Ghiti" <alexghiti@...osinc.com>,
Ley Foon Tan <leyfoon.tan@...rfivetech.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Xianting Tian <xianting.tian@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
"Andy Chiu" <andy.chiu@...ive.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 1/2] RISC-V: Probe for unaligned access speed
From: Geert Uytterhoeven
> Sent: 14 September 2023 08:33
...
> > > rzfive:
> > > cpu0: Ratio of byte access time to unaligned word access is
> > > 1.05, unaligned accesses are fast
> >
> > Hrm, I'm a little surprised to be seeing this number come out so close
> > to 1. If you reboot a few times, what kind of variance do you get on
> > this?
>
> Rock-solid at 1.05 (even with increased resolution: 1.05853 on 3 tries)
Would that match zero overhead unless the access crosses a
cache line boundary?
(I can't remember whether the test is using increasing addresses.)
...
> > > vexriscv/orangecrab:
> > >
> > > cpu0: Ratio of byte access time to unaligned word access is
> > > 0.00, unaligned accesses are slow
>
> cpu0: Ratio of byte access time to unaligned word access is 0.00417,
> unaligned accesses are slow
>
> > > I am a bit surprised by the near-zero values. Are these expected?
> >
> > This could be expected, if firmware is trapping the unaligned accesses
> > and coming out >100x slower than a native access. If you're interested
> > in getting a little more resolution, you could try to print a few more
> > decimal places with something like (sorry gmail mangles the whitespace
> > on this):
I'd expect one of three possible values:
- 1.0x: Basically zero cost except for cache line/page boundaries.
- ~2: Hardware does two reads and merges the values.
- >100: Trap fixed up in software.
I'd think the '2' case could be considered fast.
You only need to time one access to see if it was a fault.
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists