From: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>
To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: RE: [Patch 1/1] 4-level page tables v4.
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 23:30:39 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200511102330.jAANUdg21565@unix-os.sc.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051110161915.GA3630@lnx-holt.americas.sgi.com>
Robin Holt wrote on Thursday, November 10, 2005 2:39 PM
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 01:49:26PM -0800, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > Compiling with three levels, I see some differences in the scheduling
> > of instructions in the vhpt_miss handler and the nested_dtlb miss
> > handler. Side-by-side diff of a disassembly included below (original
> > sequence is on the left, new sequence is on the right). For the vhpt
> > case the new handler is 3 instructions shorter ... but shorter isn't
> > always better.
>
> I used the objdump that Jack Steiner pointed me towards to optomize the
> vhpt_miss handler and then test. This instruction order gave the best
> performance, but we are talking extremely small differences.
>
> Is the goal to make these identical? If so, it should be easy to do,
> but I was not aware that was the intent.
I was wondering earlier too why you changed all the register usage etc.
You really don't need to make that big of change since the resource
contention is around dep/cmp. cmp instruction is ALU type and can be
schedule on all 6 integer units. The easiest way is to just re-order
these two instructions. There is one change you made around tbit/dep on
line 163 (dep r23=0,r20,0,PAGE_SHIFT), but that is outside the 4-level
page table walk. And again, easiest thing to do is to pull that ins 2
bundle earlier.
- Ken
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-11-10 23:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-11-10 16:19 [Patch 1/1] 4-level page tables v4 Robin Holt
2005-11-10 21:49 ` Luck, Tony
2005-11-10 22:38 ` Robin Holt
2005-11-10 23:03 ` Luck, Tony
2005-11-10 23:30 ` Chen, Kenneth W [this message]
2005-11-10 23:54 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-11-11 0:13 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-11-11 0:24 ` Jack Steiner
2005-11-11 0:58 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-11-11 1:19 ` Robin Holt
2005-11-11 2:06 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-11-11 2:11 ` Robin Holt
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=200511102330.jAANUdg21565@unix-os.sc.intel.com \
--to=kenneth.w.chen@intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox