* Nick Piggin ([email protected]) wrote:
> Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>
> >I tried it with and without the LOCK prefix on my Pentium 4.
> >
> >Locked cmpxchg8b : 90 cycles
> >Non locked cmpxchg8b: 30 cycles
> >sti: 166 cycles
> >cli: 159 cycles
> >
> >So, hrm, even if we use the locked version, it is still much faster than
> >the sti/cli. I am thoughtful about the comment in asm-i386/system.h:
>
> Curious: what does it look like if the memory is not in cache? I
> found that cmpxchg is relatively slower than other rmw instructions
> in that case.
>
Actually, I have just seen that cmpxchg64 and cmpxchg64_local are
doing exactly this and they are already implemented in asm-i386/system.h.
A quick test: I am doing clflush in a loop (substracting its time from the
following loops) to have a memory hit when I do cmpxchg. This is the
result of just the cmpxchg8b:
non locked cmpxchg8b: 583.37 cycles
locked cmpxchg8b: 650.48 cycles
rmw in 3 operations: 581.43 cycles
So the locked cmpxchg is 67 cycles slower than the non locked cmpxchg,
which fits with my 30 vs 90 cycles. rmw is a tiny bit faster than
cmpxchg8b (2 cycles), but nothing to call home about.
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
