All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] ARM CPU Speed simulated by Qemu?
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 14:39:14 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200609121439.15226.paul@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4506B3DF.3000400@bluegap.ch>

On Tuesday 12 September 2006 14:19, Markus Schiltknecht wrote:
> Paul Brook wrote:
> > Modern CPUs are complicated, with many factors effecting execution speed
> > (pipeline interlocks, multiple levels of cache). A cycle accurate
> > simulator will generally be orders of magnitude slower than qemu.
>
> Would it be feasible to just limit the number of instructions qemu
> simulates? Of course that's not very precise and most probably far from
> cycle accurate. But it would allow to easily scale down a virtual
> machine. Which then would allow comparable benchmarks or such.
>
> One step, somewhat more accurate would be to weight all the different
> assembler commands with known (measured) average execution times. Taking
> into account 40% cache misses, for example. (Hm.. but since cache misses
> are very expensive, that might not lead to a much better approximation,
> I guess)

I'd be surprised if you managed to get any sort of reliable results.
Most of what you described can be achieved with profiling and static analysis.

You could maybe get order-of-magnitude estimates (ie. do you need a 20MHz cpu 
or a 2GHz cpu), but I certainly wouldn't trust the results for deciding 
between eg. 500MHz and 200MHz cores.

IMHO a benchmarking setup that doesn't reliably correspond to real system 
performance is worse than useless.

Paul

  reply	other threads:[~2006-09-12 13:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-09-08 19:26 [Qemu-devel] Re: qemu-system-sparc video problem on 16 bitdisplays Blue Swirl
2006-09-12  0:17 ` Stuart Brady
2006-09-12  7:20   ` [Qemu-devel] ARM CPU Speed simulated by Qemu? Tieu Ma Dau
2006-09-12 11:03     ` nyos
2006-09-12 12:43     ` Paul Brook
2006-09-12 13:19       ` Markus Schiltknecht
2006-09-12 13:39         ` Paul Brook [this message]
2006-09-12 14:21           ` Markus Schiltknecht
2006-09-12 14:34             ` Paul Brook
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-09-12 14:44 Laurent DESNOGUES
2006-09-12 14:58 ` Markus Schiltknecht
2006-09-12 17:42 ` K. Richard Pixley
2006-09-12 15:08 Laurent DESNOGUES
2006-09-12 15:19 ` Markus Schiltknecht
2006-09-12 15:26 Laurent DESNOGUES

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200609121439.15226.paul@codesourcery.com \
    --to=paul@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.