From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: In-Reply-To: <20070412042337.GA21832@aepfle.de> References: <20070410111508.GA2969@localhost.localdomain> <1176240168.8061.51.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070411025605.GB2197@localhost.localdomain> <1176262253.8061.60.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070412042337.GA21832@aepfle.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v623) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <6ffa9deb122ae953e58a88103fcfc8b9@kernel.crashing.org> From: Segher Boessenkool Subject: Re: [patch 3/3] cell: prevent alignment interrupt on local store Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 08:50:27 +0200 To: Olaf Hering Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Akinobu Mita , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Paul Mackerras , cbe-oss-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , >> This isn't just a kernel issue either; the same holds >> for all of userspace. It seems to me the only way to >> get good performance on both Cell and all other platforms >> is to have a separate binary distribution for Cell. > > How much will this impact performance on a 970, 74xx or POWER6 if > everything gets compiled with '--mcpu=$cell', compared to what is used > today? One gets at least altivec that way. Can't comment on POWER6; but on 74xx or 970 it will hurt. A lot. Say 20-%30% or so? [Yes I have no benchmark data to back this up]. Segher