From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Tue, 23 Jan 2007 16:36:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1]:61148 "EHLO dl5rb.ham-radio-op.net") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S28573881AbXAWQgr (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jan 2007 16:36:47 +0000 Received: from denk.linux-mips.net (denk.linux-mips.net [127.0.0.1]) by dl5rb.ham-radio-op.net (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l0NGakY2021504; Tue, 23 Jan 2007 16:36:46 GMT Received: (from ralf@localhost) by denk.linux-mips.net (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id l0NGakLo021503; Tue, 23 Jan 2007 16:36:46 GMT Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 16:36:46 +0000 From: Ralf Baechle To: Franck Bui-Huu Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Franck Bui-Huu Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] signals: reduce {setup,restore}_sigcontext sizes Message-ID: <20070123163646.GA21380@linux-mips.org> References: <1169561903878-git-send-email-fbuihuu@gmail.com> <11695619031540-git-send-email-fbuihuu@gmail.com> <20070123143814.GE18083@linux-mips.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 13767 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ralf@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 05:26:21PM +0100, Franck Bui-Huu wrote: > No, I haven't. Since the size code has been reduced by a factor 2, I > would think that signal code can better fit in instruction cache > lines. For example, the loop is made up by 11 instructions (I don't > know why gcc makes it so big though) which fits into 3 cache lines in > my cases. Where as the old code generated 246 instructions for the > same job, which should cause many more cache misses. > > Do you have any pointers on benchmarks I could run ? For stuff like this microbenchmarks like lmbench are best suited. Lmbench recently moved to http://sourceforge.net/projects/lmbench. Ralf