From: "Christian König" <deathsimple@vodafone.de>
To: Ilia Mirkin <imirkin@alum.mit.edu>, Lauri Kasanen <cand@gmx.com>
Cc: "dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/radeon: Inline r100_mm_rreg
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 21:30:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5346F13B.6060604@vodafone.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKb7UvgpDvE9et8Uxt6=qPH-a3bZ3p5eEXupLFhZVNEqA6B12A@mail.gmail.com>
Am 10.04.2014 20:52, schrieb Ilia Mirkin:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Lauri Kasanen <cand@gmx.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 12:19:10 -0400
>> Ilia Mirkin <imirkin@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>>
>>>> +static inline uint32_t r100_mm_rreg(struct radeon_device *rdev, uint32_t reg,
>>>> + bool always_indirect)
>>>> +{
>>>> + if (reg < rdev->rmmio_size && !always_indirect)
>>>> + return readl(((void __iomem *)rdev->rmmio) + reg);
>>> Quick thought from someone entirely unfamiliar with the hardware:
>>> perhaps you can get the performance benefit without the size increase
>>> by moving the else portion into a non-inline function? I'm guessing
>>> that most accesses happen in the "if" branch.
>> The function call overhead is about equal to branching overhead, so
>> splitting it would only help about half that. It's called from many
>> places, and a lot of calls per sec.
Actually direct register access shouldn't be necessary so often. Apart
from page flips, write/read pointer updates and irq processing there
shouldn't be so many of them. Could you clarify a bit more what issue
you are seeing here?
> Is that really true? I haven't profiled it, but a function call has to
> save/restore registers, set up new stack, etc. And the jump is to some
> far-away code, so perhaps less likely to be in i-cache? (But maybe
> not, not sure on the details of how all that works.) And I'm guessing
> most of the size increase is coming from the spinlock/unlock, which,
> I'm guessing again, is the much-rarer case.
>
> And the branch would happen either way... so that's a sunk cost.
> (Except I bet that the always_indirect param is always constant and
> that bit of the if can be resolved at compile time with that part
> being inlined.)
>
> Anyways, it was just a thought.
And a pretty much correct one. The "else" case shouldn't be necessary on
modern hardware any more and so nearly never taken.
Christian.
>
> -ilia
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-10 19:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-10 13:08 [PATCH] drm/radeon: Inline r100_mm_rreg Lauri Kasanen
2014-04-10 16:19 ` Ilia Mirkin
2014-04-10 18:46 ` Lauri Kasanen
2014-04-10 18:52 ` Ilia Mirkin
2014-04-10 19:30 ` Christian König [this message]
2014-04-11 7:52 ` Lauri Kasanen
2014-04-11 8:33 ` Christian König
2014-04-11 9:54 ` Lauri Kasanen
2014-04-11 12:32 ` Christian König
2014-04-11 16:47 ` Lauri Kasanen
2014-04-11 17:38 ` Lauri Kasanen
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=5346F13B.6060604@vodafone.de \
--to=deathsimple@vodafone.de \
--cc=cand@gmx.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=imirkin@alum.mit.edu \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox