Impact: micro-optimization
Is there any reason why x86 rdtscll have to use the out of line
function instead of inline __native_read_tsc()? native_read_tsc and
__native_read_tsc is essentially the same functions.
Patch to let x86 rdtscll() to use the inline version of read_tsc.
Signed-off-by: Ken Chen <kenchen@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
in scheduler-intense workloads native_read_tsc() overhead accounts for
20% of the system overhead:
659567 system_call 41222.9375
686796 schedule 435.7843
718382 __switch_to 665.1685
823875 switch_mm 4526.7857
1883122 native_read_tsc 55385.9412
9761990 total 2.8468
this is large part due to the rdtsc_barrier() that is done before
and after reading the TSC.
But sched_clock() is not a precise clock in the GTOD sense, using such
barriers is completely pointless. So remove the barriers and only use
them in vget_cycles().
This improves lat_ctx performance by about 5%.
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
The rdmsr instruction(et al) for i386 and x86-64 are semantically same.
The only difference is how gcc interpret constraint "A" for these targets.
Signed-off-by: Jike Song <albcamus@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Change header guards named "ASM_X86__*" to "_ASM_X86_*" since:
a. the double underscore is ugly and pointless.
b. no leading underscore violates namespace constraints.
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
