qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] tcg/README: Expand advice on number of TCG ops


From: Blue Swirl
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] tcg/README: Expand advice on number of TCG ops per target insn
Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2011 17:23:49 +0300

Thanks, applied.

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 2:00 PM, Peter Maydell <address@hidden> wrote:
> Ping?
>
> On 22 June 2011 15:40, Peter Maydell <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Expand the note on the number of TCG ops generated per target insn,
>> to be clearer about the range of applicability of the 20 op rule
>> of thumb. Also add a note about the hard MAX_OP_PER_INSTR limit.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <address@hidden>
>> ---
>> The expansion of the first bullet point is based on remarks by
>> Aurelien in this email:
>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2011-06/msg00395.html
>>
>>  tcg/README |   10 +++++++++-
>>  1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tcg/README b/tcg/README
>> index 6600122..cfdfd96 100644
>> --- a/tcg/README
>> +++ b/tcg/README
>> @@ -504,7 +504,15 @@ register.
>>  - Don't hesitate to use helpers for complicated or seldom used target
>>   instructions. There is little performance advantage in using TCG to
>>   implement target instructions taking more than about twenty TCG
>> -  instructions.
>> +  instructions. Note that this rule of thumb is more applicable to
>> +  helpers doing complex logic or arithmetic, where the C compiler has
>> +  scope to do a good job of optimisation; it is less relevant where
>> +  the instruction is mostly doing loads and stores, and in those cases
>> +  inline TCG may still be faster for longer sequences.
>> +
>> +- The hard limit on the number of TCG instructions you can generate
>> +  per target instruction is set by MAX_OP_PER_INSTR in exec-all.h --
>> +  you cannot exceed this without risking a buffer overrun.
>>
>>  - Use the 'discard' instruction if you know that TCG won't be able to
>>   prove that a given global is "dead" at a given program point. The
>> --
>> 1.7.1
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 12345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890
>          1         2         3         4         5         6         7        
>  8
>
>



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]