JFFS3 & performance
Artem B. Bityuckiy
dedekind at infradead.org
Fri Jan 7 10:28:18 EST 2005
On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 jasmine at linuxgrrls.org wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Artem B. Bityuckiy wrote:
>
> >> i) The instruction cache suffers from this penalty and is, in fact, the
> >> major issue here. Most of the wasted cycles will be waiting for an
> >> instruction to arrive from the i-cache.
>
> > I'm sorry, not exactly. Ok, could you please write the code you think is
> > better? Currentlly it is:
>
> I don't know. I guess you'd need to use inline assembler to shove the
> code around. I don't know how to do that in Linux any more, but in the
> OS I'm used to it would look something like this:
>
> /* Trash the CPU data chache */
> trash_cache();
> ts1 = TIMESTAMP();
> asm(ALIGN_32);
> for (j = 0; j < memsizes[i]; j++)
> mem[i][j] = mem[i][j] + 1;
> asm(ALIGN_32);
> for (j = 0; j < memsizes[i]; j++)
> mem[i][j] = mem[i][j] + 1;
> ts2 = TIMESTAMP();
>
Ah, you meant the *code* should be cache-line aligned ?!?
--
Best Regards,
Artem B. Bityuckiy,
St.-Petersburg, Russia.
More information about the linux-mtd
mailing list