Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 6 May 2004 16:07:54 +0100
From:      Bruce M Simpson <bms@spc.org>
To:        Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu>
Cc:        Gerrit Nagelhout <gnagelhout@sandvine.com>
Subject:   Re: 4.7 vs 5.2.1 SMP/UP bridging performance
Message-ID:  <20040506150754.GC27139@empiric.dek.spc.org>
In-Reply-To: <16538.18576.320694.79356@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>
References:  <FE045D4D9F7AED4CBFF1B3B813C85337045D8CB5@mail.sandvine.com> <16538.18576.320694.79356@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, May 06, 2004 at 10:15:44AM -0400, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
> For what its worth, using those operations yeilds these results
> on my 2.53GHz P4 (for UP)
> 
> Mutex (atomic_store_rel_int) cycles per iteration: 208 
> Mutex (sfence) cycles per iteration: 85 
> Mutex (lfence) cycles per iteration: 63 
> Mutex (mfence) cycles per iteration: 169 
> Mutex (none) cycles per iteration: 18 
> 
> lfence looks like a winner..

Please be aware, though, that the different FENCE instructions are acting
as fences against different things. The NASM documentation has a good
quick reference for what each of the instructions do, but the definitive
reference is Intel's IA-32 programmer's reference manuals.

Regards,
BMS



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040506150754.GC27139>