Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 28 Nov 1998 15:07:15 +0100 (CET) | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: [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 majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |