Re: [Bug 350] New: i386 context switch very slow compared to 2.4

[Linus Torvalds]

On Tue, 18 Mar 2003, Brian Gerst wrote:
> 
> Here's a few more data points:

Ok, this shows the behaviour I was trying to explain:

> vendor_id       : AuthenticAMD
> cpu family      : 5
> model           : 8
> model name      : AMD-K6(tm) 3D processor
> stepping        : 12
> cpu MHz         : 451.037
> empty overhead=105 cycles
> load overhead=-2 cycles
> I$ load overhead=30 cycles
> I$ load overhead=90 cycles
> I$ store overhead=95 cycles

ie loading from the same cacheline shows bad behaviour, most likely due to 
cache line exclusion. Does anybody have an original Pentium to see if I 
remember that one right?

> vendor_id       : AuthenticAMD
> cpu family      : 6
> model           : 6
> model name      : AMD Athlon(tm) Processor
> stepping        : 2
> cpu MHz         : 1409.946
> empty overhead=11 cycles
> load overhead=5 cycles
> I$ load overhead=5 cycles
> I$ load overhead=5 cycles
> I$ store overhead=826 cycles
> 
> The Athlon XP shows really bad behavior when you store to the text area.

Wow. There aren't many things that AMD tends to show the P4-like "big
latency in rare cases" behaviour.

But quite honestly, I think they made the right call, and I _expect_ that
of modern CPU's. The fact is, modern CPU's tend to need to pre-decode the
instruction stream some way, and storing to it while running from it is
just a really really bad idea. And since it's so easy to avoid it, you
really just shouldn't do it.

			Linus