[PATCH 0/4] 8xx: Optimize TLB Miss code.

[Joakim Tjernlund]

Heiko Schocher <hs at denx.de> wrote on 2010/03/04 17:30:07:

> From: Heiko Schocher <hs at denx.de>
> To: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund at transmode.se>
> Cc: Wolfgang Denk <wd at denx.de>, Klaus-Jürgen <heydeck at kieback-peter.de>,
> linuxppc-dev at ozlabs.org, Scott Wood <scottwood at freescale.com>
> Date: 2010/03/04 17:30
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] 8xx: Optimize TLB Miss code.
>
> Hello Joakim,
>
> Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > Wolfgang Denk <wd at denx.de> wrote on 2010/03/04 13:16:56:
> >> From: Wolfgang Denk <wd at denx.de>
> >> To: hs at denx.de
> >> Cc: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund at transmode.se>, Klaus-Jürgen
> >> <heydeck at kieback-peter.de>, linuxppc-dev at ozlabs.org, Scott Wood
> >> <scottwood at freescale.com>
> >> Date: 2010/03/04 13:17
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] 8xx: Optimize TLB Miss code.
> >>
> >> Dear Heiko,
> >>
> >> thanks for running the tests.
> >>
> >> In message <4B8F8BB4.6070201 at denx.de> you wrote:
> >>> here the results:
> >>>
> >>> run   version
> >>>
> >>> 1-4   2.6.33-rc6 without your patches
> >>> 5-8   2.6.33-rc6 with all your patches
> >>> 9-12   2.6.33-rc6 with patches 1,2 and 4 (without 8xx: Don't touch ACCESSED
> >> when no SWAP)
> >>> 13-16   2.6.33-rc6 with all your patches and CONFIG_PIN_TLB=y
> >> So CONFIG_PIN_TLB imroves the performance as expected, while the other
> >> patches don;t show any measurable improvememt - or am I reading the
> >> results incorrectly?

BTW, I have impl. all of the newer 2.6 TLB/MMU fixes(including the dcbX fixup) for 2.4 as well.
If there is any interest I can polish them and submit for 2.4? I do need an external tester
for that though.

 Jocke