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

[Joakim Tjernlund]

Heiko Schocher <hs at denx.de> wrote on 2010/03/08 08:46:29:
>
> Hello Joakim,
>
> Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> [...]
> > What would be interesting is to skip patch 3 and turn off
> > MODULES add PIN_TLB and compare that against your unpatched .33 but
> > with MODULES off and PIN_TLB on
>
> run     version
>
> 1-4   Linux2.6.33-rc without module support and PIN_TLB=on
> 5-8   Linux2.6.33-rc without module support and PIN_TLB=on + patches 1,2,4
>
>                  L M B E N C H  3 . 0   S U M M A R Y
>                  ------------------------------------
>        (Alpha software, do not distribute)

hmm, these results varies a lot. The only stable result I can see is:

> Memory latencies in nanoseconds - smaller is better
>     (WARNING - may not be correct, check graphs)
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Host                 OS   Mhz   L1 $   L2 $    Main mem    Rand mem    Guesses
> --------- -------------   ---   ----   ----    --------    --------    -------
> tqm8xx    Linux 2.6.33-    66   31.7  183.2       184.0      1163.0    No L2 cache?
> tqm8xx    Linux 2.6.33-    66   31.7  183.2       184.0      1164.8    No L2 cache?
> tqm8xx    Linux 2.6.33-    66   31.7  183.2       184.0      1163.2    No L2 cache?
> tqm8xx    Linux 2.6.33-    66   31.7  183.2       183.8      1163.7    No L2 cache?
> tqm8xx    Linux 2.6.33-    66   31.8  172.4       173.2      1147.3    No L2 cache?
> tqm8xx    Linux 2.6.33-    66   31.8  172.5       173.2      1148.3    No L2 cache?
> tqm8xx    Linux 2.6.33-    66   31.8  172.5       173.1      1146.9    No L2 cache?
> tqm8xx    Linux 2.6.33-    66   31.8  172.5       173.2      1147.3    No L2 cache?

I don't see why the other results vary so much. Are you using NFS or having much network
traffic?

      Jocke