Heiko Schocher <[email protected]> wrote on 2010/03/04 17:30:07: > From: Heiko Schocher <[email protected]> > To: Joakim Tjernlund <[email protected]> > Cc: Wolfgang Denk <[email protected]>, Klaus-Jürgen <[email protected]>, > [email protected], Scott Wood <[email protected]> > Date: 2010/03/04 17:30 > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] 8xx: Optimize TLB Miss code. > > Hello Joakim, > > Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > > Wolfgang Denk <[email protected]> wrote on 2010/03/04 13:16:56: > >> From: Wolfgang Denk <[email protected]> > >> To: [email protected] > >> Cc: Joakim Tjernlund <[email protected]>, Klaus-Jürgen > >> <[email protected]>, [email protected], Scott Wood > >> <[email protected]> > >> Date: 2010/03/04 13:17 > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] 8xx: Optimize TLB Miss code. > >> > >> Dear Heiko, > >> > >> thanks for running the tests. > >> > >> In message <[email protected]> you wrote: > >>> here the results: > >>> > >>> run version > >>> > >>> 1-4 2.6.33-rc6 without your patches > >>> 5-8 2.6.33-rc6 with all your patches > >>> 9-12 2.6.33-rc6 with patches 1,2 and 4 (without 8xx: Don't touch > >>> ACCESSED > >> when no SWAP) > >>> 13-16 2.6.33-rc6 with all your patches and CONFIG_PIN_TLB=y > >> So CONFIG_PIN_TLB imroves the performance as expected, while the other > >> patches don;t show any measurable improvememt - or am I reading the > >> results incorrectly?
BTW, I have impl. all of the newer 2.6 TLB/MMU fixes(including the dcbX fixup) for 2.4 as well. If there is any interest I can polish them and submit for 2.4? I do need an external tester for that though. Jocke _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
