Re: benh performance problem
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Date: 2004-02-07 21:16:43
pbbuttons is loading the machine? What about all those extra decrementer ticks? I assume benchmarks showed no performance degradation on some class of ppc32; what was the slowest system tested? For that matter, couldn't this hurt 4xx, 8xx(x), as well?
Heh, well, I did see any obvious degradation on my powerbook but I didn't benchmark much actually. Maybe I should, or make kernel HZ a config option.
Perhaps HZ should be user-configurable? Although that doesn't help distributions who'd like one kernel to work everywhere... How does Linux handle increased HZ on old i386 anyways?
I don't know :)
quoted
Not sure if I can fix any of this at this point without doing a major rewrite of the exception handling code, I suspect those CPUs don't like running in real mode and our exception handling happens mostly in that mode in ppc32...I didn't realize CPUs go slower in real mode..?
It is the case with 970's and I think with IBM G3s, I'm not sure about Motorola G4s and other CPUs. In real mode, all memory is treated like it has the G bit set, preventing speculation (among others, I suppose prefetch gets killed too). I's very visible on lmbench with a G5: The null syscall overhead of the ppc64 kernel is lower than the one of the ppc32 kernel despite actually running more code and saving more & bigger registers. Ben. ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/