From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7292 invoked by alias); 8 Apr 2013 09:12:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-ports-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-ports-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 7281 invoked by uid 89); 8 Apr 2013 09:12:04 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,TW_CP autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mail-ia0-f172.google.com (HELO mail-ia0-f172.google.com) (209.85.210.172) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Mon, 08 Apr 2013 09:12:01 +0000 Received: by mail-ia0-f172.google.com with SMTP id k38so1276432iah.31 for ; Mon, 08 Apr 2013 02:12:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :x-gm-message-state; bh=d6BHzbxoeRnVjP/zqZ1cIv/kcwjIoroS2EdWUT4ayxk=; b=ByB4rsB6UJ8kcOTZByKItmHIKS9F4QEf43vRCTGcFC2GrOQzsZy0R9/5WJ7SGJqhwN ZhJF16GZbWlMvWDaZ9JRJvPPWVbAlowhFDwrXQXbLSr9ckgw+SHEFTlgd9YPxNn95h0B rDoDhwFnEeqTHgxD2wSficIvCotnTyFO98ax9SmegdW+XuSMgbvOuzzT7Sh7v6Q3yckb uM25w6i7OoIzf5RkRt9UI5FcEKSdskRXTC1SimcoRf5pz5PoZatdJolHJAh40C7DiVTT aRRZSJ0pXbL+BR78WBwQcF6o8jADRumbTWST8mVQDZxggZ2pXz6DRFBOcvDI1EVTDyOv yaXA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.11.229 with SMTP id t5mr6104776igb.65.1365412319876; Mon, 08 Apr 2013 02:11:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.42.156.67 with HTTP; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 02:11:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130404063701.GA6324@domone.kolej.mff.cuni.cz> References: <20130403161949.GA6759@domone.kolej.mff.cuni.cz> <20130404063701.GA6324@domone.kolej.mff.cuni.cz> Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 09:12:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Patches] [PATCH] ARM: NEON detected memcpy. From: Will Newton To: =?ISO-8859-2?B?T25k+GVqIELtbGth?= Cc: "Shih-Yuan Lee (FourDollars)" , "Joseph S. Myers" , libc-ports@sourceware.org, Jesse Sung , patches@eglibc.org, YC Cheng , rex.tsai@canonical.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQksEkwwz2F/eFd1LuzO7RA5DGSUw+72kuhgLKKjIdN5TGOjbEvuhhusMAjAVmYmfwG0qMhs X-SW-Source: 2013-04/txt/msg00022.txt.bz2 On 4 April 2013 07:37, Ond=C5=99ej B=C3=ADlka wrote: > On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 12:15:17PM +0800, Shih-Yuan Lee (FourDollars) wro= te: >> Hi Ondrej, >> >> I do have some benchmark data. >> > Hi, > > Try also benchmark with real world data (20MB). I put it on > http://kam.mff.cuni.cz/~ondra/dryrun_memcpy.tar.bz2 Hi Ondrej, How was the workload chosen for this test run? Is it a known "memcpy hot" workload? Also it looks like the data was captured on x86_64? I suspect we should use a specific data set for each architecture - the alignment of data will change depending on the ABI alignment rules and different compilers inline e.g. constant sized memcpys in different ways. Last time I looked gcc seemed to be much more aggressive with inlining string functions on x86 than arm for example. Thanks, --=20 Will Newton Toolchain Working Group, Linaro