On 8 September 2011 05:35, Michael Hope michael.hope@linaro.org wrote:
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 9:32 PM, David Gilbert david.gilbert@linaro.org wrote:
On 5 September 2011 04:21, Michael Hope michael.hope@linaro.org wrote:
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Michael Hope michael.hope@linaro.org wrote: http://people.linaro.org/~michaelh/incoming/strings-performance/sizes-strlen...
That's very nice - although quite bizarre; even the lower end of the steps are suitably fast so not really anything to worry about; but it would be great to understand where the 1500 cycle difference is going at the large end.
I've re-run the strlen tests on four different A9 chips which cover four different revisions of the A9 core. See: http://people.linaro.org/~michaelh/incoming/variants-strlen-08.png
I'm afraid I don't know how to turn the /proc/cpuinfo variant and revision into an ARM rxpy. vela is v1:r0. ursa is a v1:r2. leo is a v2:r1. silverbell is a v0:r1.
The way I've interpreted this is to do
s/r/p and s/v/r in the v[0-9]:r[0-9] strings above.
Someone from the kernel team can correct me if I am wrong.
Ramana