From: Borislav Petkov <bp@amd64.org>
To: "Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu" <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
melwyn lobo <linux.melwyn@gmail.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: x86 memcpy performance
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 14:16:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110816121604.GA29251@aftab> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6296.1313462075@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2448 bytes --]
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 10:34:35PM -0400, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Aug 2011 11:59:10 +0200, Borislav Petkov said:
>
> > Benchmarking with 10000 iterations, average results:
> > size XM MM speedup
> > 119 540.58 449.491 0.8314969419
>
> > 12273 2307.86 4042.88 1.751787902
> > 13924 2431.8 4224.48 1.737184756
> > 14335 2469.4 4218.82 1.708440514
> > 15018 2675.67 1904.07 0.711622886
> > 16374 2989.75 5296.26 1.771470902
> > 24564 4262.15 7696.86 1.805863077
> > 27852 4362.53 3347.72 0.7673805572
> > 28672 5122.8 7113.14 1.388524413
> > 30033 4874.62 8740.04 1.792967931
>
> The numbers for 15018 and 27852 are *way* odd for the MM case. I don't feel
> really good about this till we understand what happened for those two cases.
Yep.
> Also, anytime I see "10000 iterations", I ask myself if the benchmark
> rigging took proper note of hot/cold cache issues. That *may* explain
> the two oddball results we see above - but not knowing more about how
> it was benched, it's hard to say.
Yeah, the more scrutiny this gets the better. So I've cleaned up my
setup and have attached it.
xm_mem.c does the benchmarking and in bench_memcpy() there's the
sse_memcpy call which is the SSE memcpy implementation using inline asm.
It looks like gcc produces pretty crappy code here because if I replace
the sse_memcpy call with xm_memcpy() from xm_memcpy.S - this is the
same function but in pure asm - I get much better numbers, sometimes
even over 2x. It all depends on the alignment of the buffers though.
Also, those numbers don't include the context saving/restoring which the
kernel does for us.
7491 1509.89 2346.94 1.554378381
8170 2166.81 2857.78 1.318890326
12277 2659.03 4179.31 1.571744176
13907 2571.24 4125.7 1.604558427
14319 2638.74 5799.67 2.19789466 <----
14993 2752.42 4413.85 1.603625603
16371 3479.11 5562.65 1.59887055
So please take a look and let me know what you think.
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach
GM: Alberto Bozzo
Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen
HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551
[-- Attachment #2: sse_memcpy.tar.bz2 --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 3508 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-08-16 12:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-12 17:59 x86 memcpy performance melwyn lobo
2011-08-12 18:33 ` Andi Kleen
2011-08-12 19:52 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-08-14 9:59 ` Borislav Petkov
2011-08-14 11:13 ` Denys Vlasenko
2011-08-14 12:40 ` Borislav Petkov
2011-08-15 13:27 ` melwyn lobo
2011-08-15 13:44 ` Denys Vlasenko
2011-08-16 2:34 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2011-08-16 12:16 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2011-09-01 15:15 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2011-09-01 16:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-09-08 8:35 ` Borislav Petkov
2011-09-08 10:58 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2011-09-09 8:14 ` Borislav Petkov
2011-09-09 10:12 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2011-09-09 11:23 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2011-09-09 13:42 ` Borislav Petkov
2011-09-09 14:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-09-09 15:35 ` Borislav Petkov
2011-12-05 12:20 ` melwyn lobo
2011-12-05 12:54 ` melwyn lobo
2011-12-05 14:36 ` Alan Cox
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-08-15 14:55 Borislav Petkov
2011-08-15 14:59 ` Andy Lutomirski
2011-08-15 15:29 ` Borislav Petkov
2011-08-15 15:36 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2011-08-15 16:12 ` Borislav Petkov
2011-08-15 17:04 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2011-08-15 18:49 ` Borislav Petkov
2011-08-15 19:11 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2011-08-15 20:05 ` Borislav Petkov
2011-08-15 20:08 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2011-08-15 16:12 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-08-15 16:58 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2011-08-15 18:26 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-08-15 18:35 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2011-08-15 18:52 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-08-16 7:19 ` melwyn lobo
2011-08-16 7:43 ` Borislav Petkov
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=20110816121604.GA29251@aftab \
--to=bp@amd64.org \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux.melwyn@gmail.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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).