From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JvGXt-0004BX-He for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 11 May 2008 14:45:17 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JvGXs-0004An-0g for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 11 May 2008 14:45:17 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=43241 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JvGXr-0004Ag-Mo for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 11 May 2008 14:45:15 -0400 Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([65.74.133.4]:56011) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JvGXr-00055u-7l for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 11 May 2008 14:45:15 -0400 From: Paul Brook Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: IO_MEM_NB_ENTRIES limit Date: Sun, 11 May 2008 19:45:09 +0100 References: <48273023.2010808@bellard.org> In-Reply-To: <48273023.2010808@bellard.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200805111945.10204.paul@codesourcery.com> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Sunday 11 May 2008, Fabrice Bellard wrote: > andrzej zaborowski wrote: > > [...] > > Here are some benchmark results: > > Benchmarks measuring the boot time mainly measure the dynamic > translation time, so they are not much meaningful. It would be better to > launch say nbench or a compilation with gcc. Once you hit userspace (particularly things like udev) you do a lot of TLB thrashing, which can show interesting things about the TLB invalidation/slow path performance. I agree things like nbench tend to be a good test of the TLB fast path. Paul