linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: leroy christophe <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
To: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] powerpc32: optimise csum_partial() loop
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 13:00:36 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55D1BED4.4040808@c-s.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55D1BDF0.4090008@c-s.fr>



Le 17/08/2015 12:56, leroy christophe a écrit :
>
>
> Le 07/08/2015 01:25, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
>> On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 05:45:45PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
>>> If this makes performance non-negligibly worse on other 32-bit 
>>> chips, and is
>>> an important improvement on 8xx, then we can use an ifdef since 8xx 
>>> already
>>> requires its own kernel build.  I'd prefer to see a benchmark 
>>> showing that it
>>> actually does make things worse on those chips, though.
>> And I'd like to see a benchmark that shows it *does not* hurt 
>> performance
>> on most chips, and does improve things on 8xx, and by how much. But it
>> isn't *me* who has to show that, it is not my patch.
> Ok, following this discussion I made some additional measurement and 
> it looks like:
> * There is almost no change on the 885
> * There is a non negligeable degradation on the 8323 (19.5 tb ticks 
> instead of 15.3)
>
> Thanks for pointing this out, I think my patch is therefore not good.
>
Oops, I was talking about my other past, the one that was to optimise 
ip_csum_fast.
I still have to measure csum_partial

Christophe

  reply	other threads:[~2015-08-17 11:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-08-05 13:29 [PATCH v2 0/2] powerpc32: Optimise csum_partial() Christophe Leroy
2015-08-05 13:29 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] powerpc32: optimise a few instructions in csum_partial() Christophe Leroy
2015-08-05 13:29 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] powerpc32: optimise csum_partial() loop Christophe Leroy
2015-08-06  0:30   ` Segher Boessenkool
2015-08-06  2:31     ` Scott Wood
2015-08-06  4:39       ` Segher Boessenkool
2015-08-06 22:45         ` Scott Wood
2015-08-06 23:25           ` Segher Boessenkool
2015-08-17 10:56             ` leroy christophe
2015-08-17 11:00               ` leroy christophe [this message]
2015-08-17 13:05                 ` leroy christophe

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=55D1BED4.4040808@c-s.fr \
    --to=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=scottwood@freescale.com \
    --cc=segher@kernel.crashing.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).