From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jul 24 22:03:56 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8A381065673; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 22:03:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mavbsd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-fx0-f54.google.com (mail-fx0-f54.google.com [209.85.161.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECB578FC19; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 22:03:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fxm13 with SMTP id 13so6100387fxm.13 for ; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 15:03:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :x-enigmail-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=bH8L3Uu/0DXElub7Uq7OzmKvMSgl1fQCcm6R+CydrXE=; b=vpb8BwcdPfJhlG2LN3hLVBNgXlEM6cpC9tKKI46NBt3WPvXfrQPfSZbnIfahhMtx8f An+G+23iNma5iUpPqNeDYxOxk0lQK/jThnID0Gqf6U08Suewaq/HAdyyvJMUUg8LtfBi nELX5mwU+NiodG0fBMfzDyWN8lsP3Fjo5OuAc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=uSOaHu/f4DqOIB4DEEo9gAPEIGbVBsGL2Ihouis6m0m7A0zaONYoxhoBZbfZWnDyoe qamHRmkY6VbWzAsXBO2AfwMU5S1yBhqVCWuQGS4/T/cAOyrqsaaGtDT7prPXvdMIGHqu 5t0WfFeMKhrKgOoUBek1sR7zlkRNBjtqg9fBw= Received: by 10.86.70.9 with SMTP id s9mr3673877fga.7.1280009034815; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 15:03:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mavbook.mavhome.dp.ua (pc.mavhome.dp.ua [212.86.226.226]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r10sm670729faq.29.2010.07.24.15.03.53 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 24 Jul 2010 15:03:54 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Alexander Motin Message-ID: <4C4B6347.1070802@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2010 01:03:51 +0300 From: Alexander Motin User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100402) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Norikatsu Shigemura , freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org References: <4C4AF046.40507@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Re: Intel TurboBoost in practice X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2010 22:03:56 -0000 Norikatsu Shigemura wrote: > On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 16:53:10 +0300 > Alexander Motin wrote: >> PS: In this case benefit is small, but it is the least that can be >> achieved, depending on CPU model. Some models allow frequency to be >> risen by up to 6 steps (+798MHz). > > I tested on Core i7 640UM (Arrandale 1.2GHz -> 2.26GHz) with > openssl speed (w/o aesni(4)) and > /usr/src/tools/tools/crypto/cryptotest.c (w/ aesni(4)). > > http://people.freebsd.org/~nork/aesni/aes128cbc-noaesni.pdf [1] > http://people.freebsd.org/~nork/aesni/aes128cbc-aesni.pdf [2] > > In my environment, according to aes128cbc-noaesni.pdf, at least, > 30% performace up by Turbo Boost (I think). The numbers are interesting, though they are not proving much, because of many other factors may influence on result. It would be more informative to do the tests with C1 and C2/C3 states used. > And according to aes128cbc-aesni.pdf, at least, 100% performance > up by Turbo Boost (I think). This IMHO is even more questionable. Single, even boosted core shouldn't be faster then 2, 3 and 4. I would say there is some scalability problem. May be context switches, locking, or something else. -- Alexander Motin