From: Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj@krystal.dyndns.org>
To: Nicholas Miell <nmiell@comcast.net>
Cc: Martin Bligh <mbligh@google.com>,
"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com>,
prasanna@in.ibm.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jes Sorensen <jes@sgi.com>, Tom Zanussi <zanussi@us.ibm.com>,
Richard J Moore <richardj_moore@uk.ibm.com>,
Michel Dagenais <michel.dagenais@polymtl.ca>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
William Cohen <wcohen@redhat.com>,
ltt-dev@shafik.org, systemtap@sources.redhat.com,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>,
Karim Yaghmour <karim@opersys.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>,
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
"Randy.Dunlap" <rdunlap@xenotime.net>,
"Jose R. Santos" <jrs@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Performance analysis of Linux Kernel Markers 0.20 for 2.6.17
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2006 11:33:17 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061001153317.GB24313@Krystal> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1159676382.2355.13.camel@entropy>
* Nicholas Miell (nmiell@comcast.net) wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-09-30 at 23:42 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > * Nicholas Miell (nmiell@comcast.net) wrote:
> > >
> > > Has anyone done any performance measurements with the "regular function
> > > call replaced by a NOP" type of marker?
> > >
> >
> > Here it is (on the same setup as the other tests : Pentium 4, 3 GHz) :
> >
> > * Execute an empty loop
> >
> > - Without marker
> > NR_LOOPS : 10000000
> > time delta (cycles): 15026497
> > cycles per loop : 1.50
> >
> > - With 5 NOPs
> > NR_LOOPS : 100000
> > time delta (cycles): 300157
> > cycles per loop : 3.00
> > added cycles per loop for nops : 3.00-1.50 = 1.50
> >
> >
> > * Execute a loop of memcpy 4096 bytes
> >
> > - Without marker
> > NR_LOOPS : 10000
> > time delta (cycles): 12981555
> > cycles per loop : 1298.16
> >
> > - With 5 NOPs
> > NR_LOOPS : 10000
> > time delta (cycles): 12983925
> > cycles per loop : 1298.39
> > added cycles per loop for nops : 0.23
> >
> >
> > If we compare this approach to the jump-over-call markers (in cycles per loop) :
> >
> > NOPs Jump over call generic Jump over call optimized
> > empty loop 1.50 1.17 2.50
> > memcpy 0.23 2.12 0.07
> >
> >
> >
> > Mathieu
>
> What about with two NOPs (".byte 0x66, 0x66, 0x90, 0x66, 0x90" - this
> should work with everything) or one (".byte 0x0f, 0x1f, 0x44, 0x00,
> 0x00" - AFAIK, this should work with P6 or newer).
>
> (Sorry, I should have mentioned this the first time.)
>
Hi,
The tests I made were with :
#define GENERIC_NOP1 ".byte 0x90\n"
#define GENERIC_NOP4 ".byte 0x8d,0x74,0x26,0x00\n"
#define GENERIC_NOP5 GENERIC_NOP1 GENERIC_NOP4
Now with the tests you ask for :
* Execute an empty loop
- 2 NOPs ".byte 0x66, 0x66, 0x90, 0x66, 0x90"
NR_LOOPS : 100000
time delta (cycles): 200190
cycles per loop : 2.00
cycles per loop for nops : 2.00-1.50 = 0.50
- 1 NOP "0x0f, 0x1f, 0x44, 0x00, 0x00"
NR_LOOPS : 100000
time delta (cycles): 300172
cycles per loop : 3.00
cycles per loop for nops : 3.00-1.50 = 2.50
* Execute a loop of memcpy 4096 bytes
- 2 NOPs ".byte 0x66, 0x66, 0x90, 0x66, 0x90"
NR_LOOPS : 10000
time delta (cycles): 12981293
cycles per loop : 1298.13
cycles per loop for nops : 1298.16-1298.13=0.03
- 1 NOP "0x0f, 0x1f, 0x44, 0x00, 0x00"
NR_LOOPS : 10000
time delta (cycles): 12985590
cycles per loop : 1298.56
cycles per loop for nops : 0.43
Mathieu
OpenPGP public key: http://krystal.dyndns.org:8080/key/compudj.gpg
Key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-01 15:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-09-30 18:01 Performance analysis of Linux Kernel Markers 0.20 for 2.6.17 Mathieu Desnoyers
2006-09-30 19:02 ` Nicholas Miell
2006-10-01 3:42 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2006-10-01 4:19 ` Nicholas Miell
2006-10-01 15:33 ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2006-10-01 23:57 ` Nicholas Miell
2006-10-02 0:07 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2006-10-02 0:53 ` Nicholas Miell
2006-10-02 14:31 ` [UPDATE] " Mathieu Desnoyers
2006-10-02 15:24 ` Jose R. Santos
2006-10-02 15:38 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2006-10-08 19:31 ` dean gaudet
2006-10-08 19:40 ` dean gaudet
2006-10-10 13:17 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
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=20061001153317.GB24313@Krystal \
--to=compudj@krystal.dyndns.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=fche@redhat.com \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=jes@sgi.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=jrs@us.ibm.com \
--cc=karim@opersys.com \
--cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ltt-dev@shafik.org \
--cc=masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com \
--cc=mbligh@google.com \
--cc=michel.dagenais@polymtl.ca \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nmiell@comcast.net \
--cc=pavel@suse.cz \
--cc=prasanna@in.ibm.com \
--cc=rdunlap@xenotime.net \
--cc=richardj_moore@uk.ibm.com \
--cc=systemtap@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=wcohen@redhat.com \
--cc=zanussi@us.ibm.com \
/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.