Re: performance measurement and caches

mschmit@ix.netcom.com (Mike Schmit )
21 Feb 1996 00:07:11 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[4 earlier articles]
Re: performance measurement and caches jgj@ssd.hcsc.com (1996-02-16)
Re: performance measurement and caches alms@pesqueira.di.ufpe.br (1996-02-16)
Re: performance measurement and caches mff@research.att.com (Mary Fernandez) (1996-02-16)
Re: performance measurement and caches grunwald@foobar.cs.colorado.edu (1996-02-17)
Re: performance measurement and caches Terje.Mathisen@hda.hydro.com (Terje Mathisen) (1996-02-18)
Re: performance measurement and caches cdg@nullstone.com (1996-02-19)
Re: performance measurement and caches mschmit@ix.netcom.com (1996-02-21)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: mschmit@ix.netcom.com (Mike Schmit )
Newsgroups: comp.compilers,comp.arch
Date: 21 Feb 1996 00:07:11 -0500
Organization: Netcom
References: 96-02-165 96-02-195 96-02-221
Keywords: architecture, performance, benchmarks

Terje Mathisen <Terje.Mathisen@hda.hydro.com> writes:
>I believe this is mostly due to the way 486, Pentium and PPro handles
>code prefetching, both 486 and PPro really likes to have the top of
>busy loops aligned near the beginning of a cache line, i.e. you can
>get this effect in single-tasking mode, with no system traffic at all.
>
>The Pentium relaxed the branch target requirement to 32-bit boundaries.


Actually, this is not true. Even though I think that I said this in my
book and I think Intel has said this too. If an instruction straddles
a cache line boundary and it is, for example, the top instruction in a
loop you will loose performance. Usually, a 4-byte boundary will work
OK. But if the instruction is 5 bytes in length, then 1 out of 8
times their will be a delay.


Mike Schmit
-------------------------------------------------------------------
mschmit@ix.netcom.com author:
408-244-6826 Pentium Processor Programming Tools
800-765-8086 ISBN: 0-12-627230-1
--


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.