[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:0.020 / U:10.380 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site