From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Scott Wood <oss@buserror.net>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc32: use stmw/lmw for non volatile registers save/restore
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 15:17:47 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160523201747.GA11583@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160523084637.063611A239A@localhost.localdomain>
On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 10:46:36AM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> lmw/stmw have a 1 cycle (2 cycles for lmw on some ppc) in addition
> and implies serialising, however it reduces the amount of instructions
> hence the amount of instruction fetch compared to the equivalent
> operation with several lzw/stw. It means less pressure on cache and
> less fetching delays on slow memory.
lmw/stmw do not work at all in LE mode, on most processors. This is a
supported configuration. NAK.
> When we transfer 20 registers, it is worth it.
> gcc uses stmw/lmw at function entry/exit to save/restore non
> volatile register, so lets also do it that way.
No, C code is compiled with -mno-multiple for LE configs. Saving a few
bytes of code is not "worth it", anyway.
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/misc_32.S
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/misc_32.S
> @@ -1086,3 +1086,25 @@ relocate_new_kernel_end:
> relocate_new_kernel_size:
> .long relocate_new_kernel_end - relocate_new_kernel
> #endif
> +
> +_GLOBAL(setjmp)
> + mflr r0
> + li r3, 0
> + stw r0, 0(r3)
> + stw r1, 4(r3)
> + stw r2, 8(r3)
> + mfcr r12
> + stmw r12, 12(r3)
> + blr
This code has been tested? I very much doubt it.
Segher
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-23 20:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-23 8:46 [PATCH] powerpc32: use stmw/lmw for non volatile registers save/restore Christophe Leroy
2016-05-23 17:26 ` Gabriel Paubert
2016-05-23 20:17 ` Segher Boessenkool [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=20160523201747.GA11583@gate.crashing.org \
--to=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=oss@buserror.net \
--cc=paulus@samba.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).