linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH v7 04/17] tracing: add static function tracer support for MIP

To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 04/17] tracing: add static function tracer support for MIPS
From: Wu Zhangjin <wuzhangjin@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:51:53 +0800
Cc: David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, zhangfx@lemote.com, zhouqg@gmail.com, Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>, rostedt@goodmis.org, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@hofr.at>, Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford@googlemail.com>, Patrik Kluba <kpajko79@gmail.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Michal Simek <monstr@monstr.eu>
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:subject:from:reply-to:to:cc :in-reply-to:references:content-type:organization:date:message-id :mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zXrDHWZ4417tnWwvfZTFEinXmI6csje3JgGTBSmY+10=; b=viZk4jlqkt1QmDM3sfJwidU6cnzDjAdIRIU+oxpJjTKv4m0JG740OIf13334nezCoY XIK6+Jhc93BOXVxPkHR5BYVaU8JaEvf3Z38qwfNjbiLMjc2EYPN9rglh6yRAK1e1WhgP sw8ttDK9d+u4ng1r08Ilwh0ht526djJE8WfcQ=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type :organization:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer :content-transfer-encoding; b=MBQG5lnLJ4E6JP9r+HkH8EBh4gcNusqVnMPaX3V+Q52sXKGRTtkvWP0+PGQwnNBMNb L1RwiEwuGPZ3y2WbGYHdnIeSAhxxH2kptzSrKhEKSmlX4t262WIq0dOtFV1Cdh0Jmhk5 gOyrG4Z/cDMcg7O+XH2IBchI0oIeuVOtdaFvU=
In-reply-to: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0911111309170.10184@eddie.linux-mips.org>
Organization: DSLab, Lanzhou University, China
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <9dc81a7a9e5a292cccdf465c533a2b08d19d6021.1257779502.git.wuzhangjin@gmail.com> <b99c08397d9ff92ac5a72bda9131df41b702fc71.1257779502.git.wuzhangjin@gmail.com> <8f579e2cece16cd22358a4ec143ef6a8c462639b.1257779502.git.wuzhangjin@gmail.com> <cefe074f5eb3cfbc2e0bb41b0c1f61fcd0190d90.1257779502.git.wuzhangjin@gmail.com> <4AF8B31C.5030802@caviumnetworks.com> <1257814817.2822.3.camel@falcon.domain.org> <4AF99848.9090000@caviumnetworks.com> <1257907351.2922.37.camel@falcon.domain.org> <alpine.LFD.2.00.0911111309170.10184@eddie.linux-mips.org>
Reply-to: wuzhangjin@gmail.com
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
Hi,

On Wed, 2009-11-11 at 13:15 +0000, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Nov 2009, Wu Zhangjin wrote:
> 
> > > -mlong-calls really degrades performance.  I have seen things like 6% 
> > > drop in network packet forwarding rates with -mlong-calls.
> > > 
> > 
> > so much drop? seems only two instructions added for it: lui, addi. from
> > this view point, I think the -fno-omit-frame-pointer(add, sd, move...)
> > will also bring with much drop.
> 
>  No, register jumps cannot be predicted -- this is where the performance 
> goes on any serious processor -- the two extra instructions are nothing 
> compared to that.  OTOH frame pointer calculations are pure arithmetic, so 
> you only lose time incurred by the instructions themselves.

Yes, I only mean the -mlong-calls and the original -mno-long-calls with
-pg.

The orignal one looks like this:

move ra, at
jal _mcount

The new one with -mlong-calls looks like this:

lui v1, HI_16BIT_OF_MCOUNT
addiu v1, v1, LOW_16BIT_OF_MCOUNT
move ra, at
jalr v1

both of them have a "jump" instruciton, so, only two lui, addiu added
for -mlong-calls ;)

what about the difference between that "jal _mcount"  and "jalr v1"?

Regards,
        Wu Zhangjin


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>