From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp3.clb.oleane.net (smtp3.clb.oleane.net [213.56.31.19]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88E7A6839F for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2005 23:21:29 +1000 (EST) From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard_Gu=E9vel?= To: "'Andy Fleming'" Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 15:23:51 +0200 Message-ID: <000501c5c4f9$0b1b81a0$5201a8c0@GEG2400> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" In-Reply-To: Cc: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org Subject: RE: How to use SPE on MPC8541 List-Id: Linux on Embedded PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , > Hmm... This is very strange, because Dhrystone is exactly the > benchmark this was tested on. How did you determine that the SPE > functions are called? I prefix the strcpy and strcmp functions with a "v" in dhry21a.c and dhry21b.c. Then I statically compile the c files with the freescale assembly source S files and not with the library libcfsl_e500.a. If I don't add the S files the ld fails else it succeeds. I retreive the symbols vstr... in the binary dhrystone with readelf. So I presume that it is the right code that is called. > I'm not sure why you aren't seeing a performance gain, but I assure > you that, if SPE instructions weren't working, Dhrystone would > crash. I confirm that if I try to run this binary without SPE in Linux kernel I get an exception. > The only other possibility I can think of is that the SPE > versions of the functions aren't being called. I don't understand what you say. Perhaps have you a pre-compiled dhrystone for Linux 2.6 I can try and compare on my board Thanks Gérard