mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: 'Geert Uytterhoeven' <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
	Evan Green <evan@rivosinc.com>
Cc: "Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@rivosinc.com>,
	"Heiko Stuebner" <heiko@sntech.de>,
	"linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Björn Töpel" <bjorn@rivosinc.com>,
	"Conor Dooley" <conor.dooley@microchip.com>,
	"Guo Ren" <guoren@kernel.org>,
	"Jisheng Zhang" <jszhang@kernel.org>,
	"linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
	"Jonathan Corbet" <corbet@lwn.net>,
	"Sia Jee Heng" <jeeheng.sia@starfivetech.com>,
	"Marc Zyngier" <maz@kernel.org>,
	"Masahiro Yamada" <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
	"Greentime Hu" <greentime.hu@sifive.com>,
	"Simon Hosie" <shosie@rivosinc.com>,
	"Andrew Jones" <ajones@ventanamicro.com>,
	"Albert Ou" <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	"Alexandre Ghiti" <alexghiti@rivosinc.com>,
	"Ley Foon Tan" <leyfoon.tan@starfivetech.com>,
	"Paul Walmsley" <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	"Anup Patel" <apatel@ventanamicro.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Xianting Tian" <xianting.tian@linux.alibaba.com>,
	"Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	"Andy Chiu" <andy.chiu@sifive.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 1/2] RISC-V: Probe for unaligned access speed
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2023 08:46:54 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <de95229a14614198894a8ce421c30d94@AcuMS.aculab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdV594xA1UoTeVixpXm3i5LDFO5cT=dd_iRwWLwvxQctZg@mail.gmail.com>

From: Geert Uytterhoeven
> Sent: 14 September 2023 08:33
...
> > >     rzfive:
> > >         cpu0: Ratio of byte access time to unaligned word access is
> > > 1.05, unaligned accesses are fast
> >
> > Hrm, I'm a little surprised to be seeing this number come out so close
> > to 1. If you reboot a few times, what kind of variance do you get on
> > this?
> 
> Rock-solid at 1.05 (even with increased resolution: 1.05853 on 3 tries)

Would that match zero overhead unless the access crosses a
cache line boundary?
(I can't remember whether the test is using increasing addresses.)

...
> > >     vexriscv/orangecrab:
> > >
> > >         cpu0: Ratio of byte access time to unaligned word access is
> > > 0.00, unaligned accesses are slow
> 
> cpu0: Ratio of byte access time to unaligned word access is 0.00417,
> unaligned accesses are slow
> 
> > > I am a bit surprised by the near-zero values.  Are these expected?
> >
> > This could be expected, if firmware is trapping the unaligned accesses
> > and coming out >100x slower than a native access. If you're interested
> > in getting a little more resolution, you could try to print a few more
> > decimal places with something like (sorry gmail mangles the whitespace
> > on this):

I'd expect one of three possible values:
- 1.0x: Basically zero cost except for cache line/page boundaries.
- ~2: Hardware does two reads and merges the values.
- >100: Trap fixed up in software.

I'd think the '2' case could be considered fast.
You only need to time one access to see if it was a fault.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)

  reply	other threads:[~2023-09-14  8:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-08-18 19:41 [PATCH v4 0/2] RISC-V: Probe for misaligned " Evan Green
2023-08-18 19:41 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] RISC-V: Probe for unaligned " Evan Green
2023-09-13 12:36   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2023-09-13 17:46     ` Evan Green
2023-09-14  7:32       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2023-09-14  8:46         ` David Laight [this message]
2023-09-14 15:01           ` Evan Green
2023-09-14 15:55             ` David Laight
2023-09-14 16:36               ` Evan Green
2023-09-15  7:57                 ` David Laight
2023-09-15 16:47                   ` Evan Green
2023-10-19  6:37         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2023-10-19  7:51           ` Lad, Prabhakar
2023-08-18 19:41 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] RISC-V: alternative: Remove feature_probe_func Evan Green
2023-08-30 20:30 ` [PATCH v4 0/2] RISC-V: Probe for misaligned access speed patchwork-bot+linux-riscv

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=de95229a14614198894a8ce421c30d94@AcuMS.aculab.com \
    --to=david.laight@aculab.com \
    --cc=ajones@ventanamicro.com \
    --cc=alexghiti@rivosinc.com \
    --cc=andy.chiu@sifive.com \
    --cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
    --cc=apatel@ventanamicro.com \
    --cc=bjorn@rivosinc.com \
    --cc=conor.dooley@microchip.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=evan@rivosinc.com \
    --cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=greentime.hu@sifive.com \
    --cc=guoren@kernel.org \
    --cc=heiko@sntech.de \
    --cc=jeeheng.sia@starfivetech.com \
    --cc=jszhang@kernel.org \
    --cc=leyfoon.tan@starfivetech.com \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
    --cc=palmer@rivosinc.com \
    --cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
    --cc=shosie@rivosinc.com \
    --cc=xianting.tian@linux.alibaba.com \
    /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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®