From: Robert.Boermans@uk.telex.com
To: Denis Vlasenko <vda@ilport.com.ua>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bogomips on AMD X2 (was Re:)
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 15:02:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <OFB4729D93.721C31AE-ON80257083.004CBAE1-80257083.004D28F3@telex.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200509211653.17999.vda@ilport.com.ua>
> > I noticed that the bogomips results for the two cores on my machine
are
> > consistently not the same, the second one is always reported slightly
> > faster, it's a small difference and I saw the same in a posted dmesg
> from
> > somebody else on the list. Which made me wonder:
>
> I guess it's a cache warming effect. Please show the numbers.
>
> Probably not, got this one from a web site, and on this one the first
core
> seems to be faster (can't check my own machine it's off and at home and
> I'm at work.) The difference I get is similar, but always with the
second
> one faster. It's the same when using cat on /proc/cpuinfo. Oh and I saw
it
> on 2.6.11 and 2.6.12 as supplied with fedora core 4 myself.
>
> Calibrating delay using timer specific routine.. 4014.73 BogoMIPS
> (lpj=8029470)
...
> Initializing CPU#1
> Calibrating delay using timer specific routine.. 4005.37 BogoMIPS
> (lpj=8010751)
Why do you think it cannot be a cache warming effect?
--
vda
----------
Because with this one the first case was the faster one, that would need
cache cooling :)
But besides that, as far as I remember the actual loop is about 3
instructions long and will be cache hot in a time that you'd never notice
in the end result.
Sorry about the formatting, but it's lotus notes :/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-09-21 14:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-09-21 13:20 Robert.Boermans
2005-09-21 13:27 ` Denis Vlasenko
2005-09-21 13:44 ` Bogomips on AMD X2 (was Robert.Boermans
2005-09-21 13:53 ` Denis Vlasenko
2005-09-21 14:02 ` Robert.Boermans [this message]
2005-09-21 14:14 ` OT: " Clemens Koller
2005-09-21 13:58 ` Michael Concannon
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=OFB4729D93.721C31AE-ON80257083.004CBAE1-80257083.004D28F3@telex.com \
--to=robert.boermans@uk.telex.com \
--cc=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vda@ilport.com.ua \
/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: link
Be 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 NNTP newsgroup(s).