On Thu, 12 Aug 1999, Paul Mackerras wrote:

Richard Henderson [off-list ref] wrote:
The results tended to vary quite a lot from run to run, but here's a
typical set:

17 10 9 9 9
24 17 16 16 16
732 731 736 786 727
666 755 840 774 801

So the eieio doesn't look to be nearly as expensive on PPC as wmb is
on alpha.  (16 - 9) / 7 = 1 cycle for the eieio, which is going to be

I'm seeing different things (results don't tend to vary a lot):

| [14:27:01]/tmp# ./a.out 0xc2800000
| 35 29 30 31 28 
| 261 251 247 248 248 
| 429 332 358 374 348 
| 541 532 529 531 529 
| [14:27:05]/tmp# 

Hence eieio() is quite expensive on memory.

This in on an IBM LongTrail (CHRP), with 604e at 200 MHz, 512 KB L2 cache,
66 MHz SDRAM bus, and 33 MHz PCI to an ATI RAGE II+.

insignificant in the context of an access to a device register, which
can easily take ~ 50 to 100 cycles.

For ISA (through PCI/ISA bridge). Isn't real PCI faster?

Greetings,

						Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven                     Geert.Uytterhoeven@cs.kuleuven.ac.be
Wavelets, Linux/{m68k~Amiga,PPC~CHRP}  http://www.cs.kuleuven.ac.be/~geert/
Department of Computer Science -- Katholieke Universiteit Leuven -- Belgium


[[ This message was sent via the linuxppc-dev mailing list.  Replies are ]]
[[ not  forced  back  to the list, so be sure to Cc linuxppc-dev if your ]]
[[ reply is of general interest. Please check http://lists.linuxppc.org/ ]]
[[ and http://www.linuxppc.org/ for useful information before posting.   ]]