Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 8 Jun 2007 03:25:19 -0400 (EDT) | From | "Robert P. J. Day" <> | Subject | Re: why does the macro "ZERO_PAGE" take an argument? |
| |
On Thu, 7 Jun 2007, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> William Lee Irwin III wrote: > > Robert P. J. Day wrote: > >>> although it's not clear where in the source tree are the invocations > >>> that would actually make a difference to a MIPS system, which is why > >>> i've CC'ed ralf on this. i'm sure he can clear this up. :-) > > > > On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 10:32:29AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > >> x86 could also benefit from coloured zeropages. In fact, I thought it > >> already had them (K8 wants as many as 8.) > > > > How would one demonstrate the beneficial effect of such? > > Dean Gaudet at Transmeta did some benchmarking using SPEC. If I > recall his numbers correctly (this is from memory, mind you) on > Transmeta Efficeon, which has 2-way virtual cache tagging with > hardware recovery, zeropage coloring was a 1.5% performance > improvement.
and once again, an initially innocuous question quickly leaves me behind. no, no, i'm getting used to it. :-P
rday
-- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
http://fsdev.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page ======================================================================== - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |