[PATCH v2 01/25] powerpc/8xx: Save r3 all the time in DTLB miss handler

[christophe leroy]

Le 06/10/2015 18:46, Scott Wood a écrit :
> On Tue, 2015-10-06 at 15:35 +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> Le 29/09/2015 00:07, Scott Wood a écrit :
>>> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 06:50:29PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>>>> We are spending between 40 and 160 cycles with a mean of 65 cycles in
>>>> the TLB handling routines (measured with mftbl) so make it more
>>>> simple althought it adds one instruction.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy at c-s.fr>
>>> Does this just make it simpler or does it make it faster?  What is the
>>> performance impact?  Is the performance impact seen with or without
>>> CONFIG_8xx_CPU6 enabled?  Without it, it looks like you're adding an
>>> mtspr/mfspr combo in order to replace one mfspr.
>>>
>>>
>> The performance impact is not noticeable. Theoritically it adds 1 cycle
>> on a mean of 65 cycles, that is 1.5%. Even in the worst case where we
>> spend around 10% of the time in TLB handling exceptions, that represents
>> only 0.15% of the total CPU time. So that's almost nothing.
>> Behind the fact to get in simpler, the main reason is because I need a
>> third register for the following patch in the set, otherwise I would
>> spend a more time saving and restoring CR several times.
> FWIW, the added instruction is an SPR access and I doubt that's only one
> cycle.
>
>
According to the mpc885 reference manual (table 9-1), Instruction 
Execution Timing for "Move to: mtspr, mtcrf, mtmsr, mcrxr except mtspr to LR
and CTR and to SPRs external to the core" is "serialize + 1 cycle".
Taking into account we preeceeding instructions are also 'mtspr', we are 
already serialized, so it is only one cycle I believe.
Am I interpreting it wrong ?

Christophe

---
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus