public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "vvv at ru dot ru" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/39942] Nonoptimal code - leaveq; xchg %ax,%ax; retq Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 17:13:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20090513171316.28820.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-39942-17483@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> ------- Comment #21 from vvv at ru dot ru 2009-05-13 17:13 ------- I guess! Your patch is absolutely correct for AMD AthlonTM 64 and AMD OpteronTM processors, but it is nonoptimal for Intel processors. Because: 1. AMD limitation for 16-bytes page (memory range XXXXXXX0 - XXXXXXXF), but Intel limitation for 16-bytes chunk (memory range XXXXXXXX - XXXXXXXX+10h) 2. AMD - maximum of _THREE_ near branches (CALL, JMP, conditional branches, or returns), Intel - maximum of _FOUR_ branches! Quotation from Software Optimization Guide for AMD64 Processors 6.1 Density of Branches When possible, align branches such that they do not cross a 16-byte boundary. The AMD AthlonTM 64 and AMD OpteronTM processors have the capability to cache branch-prediction history for a maximum of three near branches (CALL, JMP, conditional branches, or returns) per 16-byte fetch window. A branch instruction that crosses a 16-byte boundary is counted in the second 16-byte window. Due to architectural restrictions, a branch that is split across a 16-byte boundary cannot dispatch with any other instructions when it is predicted taken. Perform this alignment by rearranging code; it is not beneficial to align branches using padding sequences. The following branches are limited to three per 16-byte window: jcc rel8 jcc rel32 jmp rel8 jmp rel32 jmp reg jmp WORD PTR jmp DWORD PTR call rel16 call r/m16 call rel32 call r/m32 Coding more than three branches in the same 16-byte code window may lead to conflicts in the branch target buffer. To avoid conflicts in the branch target buffer, space out branches such that three or fewer exist in a given 16-byte code window. For absolute optimal performance, try to limit branches to one per 16-byte code window. Avoid code sequences like the following: ALIGN 16 label3: call label1 ; 1st branch in 16-byte code window jc label3 ; 2nd branch in 16-byte code window call label2 ; 3rd branch in 16-byte code window jnz label4 ; 4th branch in 16-byte code window ; Cannot be predicted. If there is a jump table that contains many frequently executed branches, pad the table entries to 8 bytes each to assure that there are never more than three branches per 16-byte block of code. Only branches that have been taken at least once are entered into the dynamic branch prediction, and therefore only those branches count toward the three-branch limit. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39942
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-13 17:13 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2009-04-28 12:20 [Bug c/39942] New: " vvv at ru dot ru 2009-04-28 13:42 ` [Bug target/39942] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-28 17:05 ` vvv at ru dot ru 2009-04-28 17:10 ` vvv at ru dot ru 2009-04-28 17:15 ` vvv at ru dot ru 2009-04-28 17:37 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-04-28 21:19 ` vvv at ru dot ru 2009-04-28 21:23 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-28 21:47 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-04-28 21:53 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-28 21:54 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-04-29 7:46 ` vvv at ru dot ru 2009-04-29 7:55 ` vvv at ru dot ru 2009-04-29 9:32 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-29 10:13 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-29 19:17 ` vvv at ru dot ru 2009-04-30 9:07 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-12 16:41 ` vvv at ru dot ru 2009-05-13 8:31 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-13 11:43 ` vvv at ru dot ru 2009-05-13 13:32 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-13 17:13 ` vvv at ru dot ru [this message] 2009-05-13 18:22 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-05-13 18:34 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-13 18:45 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-05-13 18:57 ` vvv at ru dot ru 2009-05-13 19:06 ` vvv at ru dot ru 2009-05-13 19:09 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-13 19:19 ` vvv at ru dot ru 2009-05-13 21:44 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-05-14 9:01 ` vvv at ru dot ru 2009-05-14 15:16 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-14 15:58 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-05-14 18:37 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-05-14 19:44 ` vvv at ru dot ru 2009-05-15 2:23 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-05-15 4:32 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-05-15 7:56 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-15 12:11 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-15 12:12 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-15 14:35 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-05-15 16:25 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-15 18:18 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-15 18:23 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-15 23:06 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-05-16 6:38 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 7:10 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-16 7:12 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-18 17:21 ` hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-20 21:38 ` vvv at ru dot ru 2009-05-20 22:09 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-21 13:22 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-21 13:26 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org [not found] <bug-39942-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> 2020-04-14 21:20 ` peter at cordes dot ca
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20090513171316.28820.qmail@sourceware.org \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).