[lkml]   [1998]   [Nov]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch] entry.S asm improvement (removed some ugly jmp)
On 28 Nov 1998, Benoit Poulot-Cazajous wrote:

>It is a lot SLOWER in my K6-2/300 :
>2.1.130 simulation : 1.125s
>2.1.130 + your patch : 2.954s
>It is also slower on a PII/300 :
>2.1.130 simulation : 1.790s
>2.1.130 + your patch : 3.284s

I think that my simulation was bogus. This because I guess that return_all
will invalidate any kind of return prediction... So the patch could
improve things even if the simulation didn' t agreed. Is there any
volunteers that could do a benchmark of 2.1.130 and 2.1.130 + my asm
patch? To benchmark you should generate a signal flood to run many times a
signal handler or something similar... I am not going to benchmark myself
since my hardware seems to not care too much about the return prediction ;)

Andrea Arcangeli

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:45    [W:0.042 / U:7.484 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site