Wolfgang Denk <w...@denx.de> wrote on 2010/03/04 13:16:56:
> From: Wolfgang Denk <w...@denx.de>
> To: h...@denx.de
> Cc: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernl...@transmode.se>, Klaus-Jürgen
> <heyd...@kieback-peter.de>, linuxppc-...@ozlabs.org, Scott Wood
> <scottw...@freescale.com>
> Date: 2010/03/04 13:17
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] 8xx: Optimize TLB Miss code.
>
> Dear Heiko,
>
> thanks for running the tests.
>
> In message <4b8f8bb4.6070...@denx.de> you wrote:
> >
> > here the results:
> >
> > run version
> >
> > 1-4 2.6.33-rc6 without your patches
> > 5-8 2.6.33-rc6 with all your patches
> > 9-12 2.6.33-rc6 with patches 1,2 and 4 (without 8xx: Don't touch ACCESSED
> when no SWAP)
> > 13-16 2.6.33-rc6 with all your patches and CONFIG_PIN_TLB=y
>
> So CONFIG_PIN_TLB imroves the performance as expected, while the other
> patches don;t show any measurable improvememt - or am I reading the
> results incorrectly?
Close but not quite. What stands out most is:
Memory latencies in nanoseconds - smaller is better
(WARNING - may not be correct, check graphs)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Host OS Mhz L1 $ L2 $ Main mem Rand mem Guesses
--------- ------------- --- ---- ---- -------- -------- -------
tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.8 141.0 184.0 1165.7
tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.8 141.2 184.2 1165.3
tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.8 141.3 184.3 1165.6
tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.8 141.3 184.2 1166.2
tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.8 141.0 171.8 1100.5 No L2
cache?
tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.8 141.0 171.8 1102.5 No L2
cache?
tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.8 141.0 171.8 1101.7 No L2
cache?
tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.8 141.0 171.8 1101.6 No L2
cache?
tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.8 141.1 173.4 1149.1 No L2
cache?
tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.8 141.1 173.4 1149.0 No L2
cache?
tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.7 141.1 173.4 1148.7 No L2
cache?
tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.7 141.1 173.4 1148.2 No L2
cache?
tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.8 171.1 171.7 1099.8 No L2
cache?
tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.8 171.1 171.6 1100.5 No L2
cache?
tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.7 171.0 171.7 1101.0 No L2
cache?
tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.8 171.0 171.6 1101.3 No L2
cache?
Besides the numbers, note how the first group doesn't have a Guesses entry.
Is there something odd with the results for the first group?
Also, since you are using MODULES, patch 2 is nullified.
Patch 1 is very minor and should not show I think.
This leaves patches 3 & 4.
There appears to be something funny with patch 3,Don't touch ACCESSED when no
SWAP, as
it yields bad numbers for Prot Fault so perhaps I am missing something that
needs ACCESSED
even if NO_SWAP. Perhaps a someone that knows MM in Linux knows?
Is there any messages in the kernel log(dmesg)?
Jocke
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
