All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: leroy christophe <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
To: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] powerpc32: optimise csum_partial() loop
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 13:00:36 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55D1BED4.4040808@c-s.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55D1BDF0.4090008@c-s.fr>



Le 17/08/2015 12:56, leroy christophe a écrit :
>
>
> Le 07/08/2015 01:25, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
>> On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 05:45:45PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
>>> If this makes performance non-negligibly worse on other 32-bit 
>>> chips, and is
>>> an important improvement on 8xx, then we can use an ifdef since 8xx 
>>> already
>>> requires its own kernel build.  I'd prefer to see a benchmark 
>>> showing that it
>>> actually does make things worse on those chips, though.
>> And I'd like to see a benchmark that shows it *does not* hurt 
>> performance
>> on most chips, and does improve things on 8xx, and by how much. But it
>> isn't *me* who has to show that, it is not my patch.
> Ok, following this discussion I made some additional measurement and 
> it looks like:
> * There is almost no change on the 885
> * There is a non negligeable degradation on the 8323 (19.5 tb ticks 
> instead of 15.3)
>
> Thanks for pointing this out, I think my patch is therefore not good.
>
Oops, I was talking about my other past, the one that was to optimise 
ip_csum_fast.
I still have to measure csum_partial

Christophe

  reply	other threads:[~2015-08-17 11:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-08-05 13:29 [PATCH v2 0/2] powerpc32: Optimise csum_partial() Christophe Leroy
2015-08-05 13:29 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] powerpc32: optimise a few instructions in csum_partial() Christophe Leroy
2015-08-05 13:29 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] powerpc32: optimise csum_partial() loop Christophe Leroy
2015-08-06  0:30   ` Segher Boessenkool
2015-08-06  2:31     ` Scott Wood
2015-08-06  4:39       ` Segher Boessenkool
2015-08-06 22:45         ` Scott Wood
2015-08-06 23:25           ` Segher Boessenkool
2015-08-17 10:56             ` leroy christophe
2015-08-17 11:00               ` leroy christophe [this message]
2015-08-17 13:05                 ` leroy christophe

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=55D1BED4.4040808@c-s.fr \
    --to=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=scottwood@freescale.com \
    --cc=segher@kernel.crashing.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.