All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sboyd@codeaurora.org (Stephen Boyd)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] ARM: Use udiv/sdiv for __aeabi_{u}idiv library functions
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 17:23:12 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <52818300.70003@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHCPf3tCTUEX6oDLUndZwt=Hk+YxsKjPO96N=Zhx82+_LM66sQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/08/13 22:46, Matt Sealey wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> If we're running on a v7 ARM CPU, detect if the CPU supports the
>> sdiv/udiv instructions and replace the signed and unsigned
>> division library functions with an sdiv/udiv instruction.
>>
>> Running the perf messaging benchmark in pipe mode
>>
>>  $ perf bench sched messaging -p
>>
>> shows a modest improvement on my v7 CPU.
>>
>> before:
>> (5.060 + 5.960 + 5.971 + 5.643 + 6.029 + 5.665 + 6.050 + 5.870 + 6.117 + 5.683) / 10 = 5.805
>>
>> after:
>> (4.884 + 5.549 + 5.749 + 6.001 + 5.460 + 5.103 + 5.956 + 6.112 + 5.468 + 5.093) / 10 = 5.538
>>
>> (5.805 - 5.538) / 5.805 = 4.6%
> Even with the change to the output constraint suggested by Mans, you
> get absolutely identical benchmark results? There's a lot of variance
> in any case..

Yeah sorry I didn't run the testcase again to see if numbers changed
because I assumed one less instruction would be in the noise. I agree
there is a lot of variance so if you have any better
benchmarks/testcases please let me know.

>
> BTW has there been any evaluation of the penalty for the extra
> branching, or the performance hit for the ARMv7-without-division
> cases?

I haven't done any. I'll factor that in for the next round.

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
To: Matt Sealey <neko@bakuhatsu.net>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD" <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>,
	"Christopher Covington" <cov@codeaurora.org>,
	"Russell King - ARM Linux" <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	"Måns Rullgård" <mans@mansr.com>,
	"Rob Herring" <robherring2@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: Use udiv/sdiv for __aeabi_{u}idiv library functions
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 17:23:12 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <52818300.70003@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHCPf3tCTUEX6oDLUndZwt=Hk+YxsKjPO96N=Zhx82+_LM66sQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/08/13 22:46, Matt Sealey wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> If we're running on a v7 ARM CPU, detect if the CPU supports the
>> sdiv/udiv instructions and replace the signed and unsigned
>> division library functions with an sdiv/udiv instruction.
>>
>> Running the perf messaging benchmark in pipe mode
>>
>>  $ perf bench sched messaging -p
>>
>> shows a modest improvement on my v7 CPU.
>>
>> before:
>> (5.060 + 5.960 + 5.971 + 5.643 + 6.029 + 5.665 + 6.050 + 5.870 + 6.117 + 5.683) / 10 = 5.805
>>
>> after:
>> (4.884 + 5.549 + 5.749 + 6.001 + 5.460 + 5.103 + 5.956 + 6.112 + 5.468 + 5.093) / 10 = 5.538
>>
>> (5.805 - 5.538) / 5.805 = 4.6%
> Even with the change to the output constraint suggested by Mans, you
> get absolutely identical benchmark results? There's a lot of variance
> in any case..

Yeah sorry I didn't run the testcase again to see if numbers changed
because I assumed one less instruction would be in the noise. I agree
there is a lot of variance so if you have any better
benchmarks/testcases please let me know.

>
> BTW has there been any evaluation of the penalty for the extra
> branching, or the performance hit for the ARMv7-without-division
> cases?

I haven't done any. I'll factor that in for the next round.

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation


  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-11-12  1:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-11-08 23:00 [PATCH v2] ARM: Use udiv/sdiv for __aeabi_{u}idiv library functions Stephen Boyd
2013-11-08 23:00 ` Stephen Boyd
2013-11-09  6:46 ` Matt Sealey
2013-11-09  6:46   ` Matt Sealey
2013-11-09 18:20   ` Måns Rullgård
2013-11-09 18:20     ` Måns Rullgård
2013-11-12  1:23   ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
2013-11-12  1:23     ` Stephen Boyd
2013-11-10  5:03 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-11-10  5:03   ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-11-12  2:34   ` Stephen Boyd
2013-11-12  2:34     ` Stephen Boyd
2013-11-12 11:28     ` Måns Rullgård
2013-11-12 11:28       ` Måns Rullgård
2013-11-12 14:01     ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-11-12 14:01       ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-11-12 14:04       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-11-12 14:04         ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-11-12 14:16         ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-11-12 14:16           ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-11-12 14:17         ` Ben Dooks
2013-11-12 14:17           ` Ben Dooks
2013-11-12 14:32           ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-11-12 14:32             ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-11-12 14:40             ` Måns Rullgård
2013-11-12 14:40               ` Måns Rullgård
2013-11-12 14:55               ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-11-12 14:55                 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-11-12 15:20                 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-11-12 15:20                   ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-11-12 18:03                 ` Måns Rullgård
2013-11-12 18:03                   ` Måns Rullgård
2013-11-12 14:22       ` Måns Rullgård
2013-11-12 14:22         ` Måns Rullgård
2013-11-12 14:36         ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-11-12 14:36           ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-11-11  7:46 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2013-11-11  7:46   ` Uwe Kleine-König
2013-11-12  2:35   ` Stephen Boyd
2013-11-12  2:35     ` Stephen Boyd

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=52818300.70003@codeaurora.org \
    --to=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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.