From: David Mosberger <davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com>
To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Linux-ia64] strange performance behaviour with floats
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 02:30:32 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-linux-ia64-105590709805905@msgid-missing> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <marc-linux-ia64-105590709805852@msgid-missing>
>>>>> On Thu, 20 Feb 2003 20:59:47 +0100, Volker Birk <vb@ebios.de> said:
Volker> On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 09:52:43AM -0800, David Mosberger
Volker> wrote:
>> Hmmh, that's really strange. I assume you realize that your
>> test-program doesn't really do what the source code suggests (the
>> loop-body gets optimized away), but regardless the high variation
>> you're seeing seems wrong.
Volker> I think, optimazation does not matter on that point.
I looked into this a bit more. Your test program is basically a
1-cycle loop:
4000000000000770: 0a 00 00 00 01 00 [MMI] nop.m 0x0
4000000000000776: 00 00 00 02 00 00 nop.m 0x0
400000000000077c: 00 00 04 00 nop.i 0x0
4000000000000780: 1c 00 00 00 01 00 [MFB] nop.m 0x0
4000000000000786: 00 00 00 02 00 a0 nop.f 0x0
400000000000078c: f0 ff ff 48 br.cloop.sptk.few 40
This is because gcc optimizes away to loop-body. If you change the loop
to:
for (i=0;i<1000000000;i++) {
asm volatile ("nop 0;;");
}
you'll get a 2-cycle loop which will execute consistently in 2 seconds
(on a 1GHz McKinley), which is what you'd expect. 1-cycle loops are
never optimal on McKinley (that's why the Linux bogomips comes out at
1438 instead of 2000, for example), though I don't know the exact
micro-architectural details that cause this.
--david
prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-02-22 2:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-02-14 9:02 [Linux-ia64] strange performance behaviour with floats Volker Birk
2003-02-14 10:50 ` Hideki Yamamoto
2003-02-15 11:29 ` Volker Birk
2003-02-19 19:09 ` David Mosberger
2003-02-20 17:52 ` David Mosberger
2003-02-20 19:59 ` Volker Birk
2003-02-22 2:30 ` David Mosberger [this message]
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=marc-linux-ia64-105590709805905@msgid-missing \
--to=davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.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.