Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 02 Mar 2015 23:51:17 +0900 | From | Hitoshi Mitake <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 00/15] x86, alternatives: Instruction padding and more robust JMPs |
| |
Hi Borislav,
At Thu, 26 Feb 2015 19:13:38 +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > Hi all, > > So this alternatives patchset breaks perf bench mem, here are a couple > of patches ontop, you guys tell me whether it makes sense. I wanted to > make it run all memset/memcpy routines so here are a couple of patches > which do this: > > ./perf bench mem memset -l 20MB -r all > # Running 'mem/memset' benchmark: > Routine default (Default memset() provided by glibc) > # Copying 20MB Bytes ... > > 1.136000 GB/Sec > 6.026304 GB/Sec (with prefault) > Routine x86-64-unrolled (unrolled memset() in arch/x86/lib/memset_64.S) > # Copying 20MB Bytes ... > > 5.333493 GB/Sec > 5.633473 GB/Sec (with prefault) > Routine x86-64-stosq (movsq-based memset() in arch/x86/lib/memset_64.S) > # Copying 20MB Bytes ... > > 5.828484 GB/Sec > 5.851183 GB/Sec (with prefault) > Routine x86-64-stosb (movsb-based memset() in arch/x86/lib/memset_64.S) > # Copying 20MB Bytes ... > > 5.553384 GB/Sec > 5.956465 GB/Sec (with prefault) > > This way you can see all results by executing one command only with "-r > all". > > Patches coming as a reply to this message.
I'm not sure I'm a suitable person for reviewing your patch, but I tested this patchset for perf bench with your latest (v2) patchset for x86 alternatives. It looks good to me. Reviewed-by: Hitoshi Mitake <mitake.hitoshi@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Thanks, Hitoshi
| |