From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1GjDoM-0003gb-Ga
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 12 Nov 2006 06:47:42 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1GjDoG-0003Yt-VN
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 12 Nov 2006 06:47:41 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GjDoG-0003YW-Mx
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 12 Nov 2006 06:47:36 -0500
Received: from [193.252.22.23] (helo=smtp-msa-out08.orange.fr)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GjDoG-00082W-Bd
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 12 Nov 2006 06:47:36 -0500
Received: from [192.168.0.2] (ANice-251-1-39-161.w86-206.abo.wanadoo.fr
	[86.206.22.161])
	by mwinf0804.orange.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 33F831C003D9
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sun, 12 Nov 2006 12:47:32 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <45570A32.3030608@wanadoo.fr>
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 12:49:06 +0100
From: Laurent Desnogues <laurent.desnogues@wanadoo.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Huge TLB performance improvement
References: <20060306145929.GD27785@networkno.de>	<20061105153820.GB22548@nevyn.them.org>
	<20061112011035.GB21771@nevyn.them.org>
In-Reply-To: <20061112011035.GB21771@nevyn.them.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Daniel Jacobowitz a =E9crit :
>=20
> Straight qemu with my previously posted MIPS patches takes 6:13 to
> start and reboot a MIPS userspace (through init, so lots of fork/exec).
>=20
> Thiemo's patch, which flushes the whole jump buffer, cuts it to 1:40.
>=20
> A patch which finds the entries which need to be flushed more
> efficiently cuts it to 1:21.
>=20
> A patch which flushes up to 1/32nd of the jump buffer indiscriminately
> cuts it to 1:11-1:13.

Warning:  I don't know anything about the Qemu MMU implementation
so this question is perhaps stupid :)

Did you try to benchmark some user space applications with the
various implementations you propose?  The boot of a Linux kernel
is quite heavy on various kinds of flushes and so is very
different from "standard" applications.


			Laurent