Hi, About the patch http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/, we got an issue report from member. It could improve the micro benchmark but hurt general benchmark actually. Here is their test result:
bionic-benchmarks32 BM_string_memcpy: Size AOSP Linaro Perf Improvement 8 450.7 329.5 -37% 64 1715.7 2225.3 23% 512 3100.7 4253.0 27% 1K 3271.8 4652.3 30% 8K 2460.9 3174.7 22% 16K 2267.4 2953.2 23% 32K 2222.9 2800.7 21% 64K 2204.3 2640.1 17%
without patch with patch perf delta Quadrant mem 3400 2100 -38% GeekBench3 single-core 436 260 -40% multi-core 434 358 -18%
I am wondering whether this is an known issue or not for this list. Thanks in advance.
Regards Yin, Fengwei
Hi Fengwei,
Thanks for the report. I think we would be interested in knowing the nature of the test being used.
I've added Bero to the CC as I'm sure he'll be interested as well.
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:35 PM, yfw fengwei.yin@linaro.org wrote:
Hi, About the patch http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/, we got an issue report from member. It could improve the micro benchmark but hurt general benchmark actually. Here is their test result:
bionic-benchmarks32 BM_string_memcpy: Size AOSP Linaro Perf Improvement 8 450.7 329.5 -37% 64 1715.7 2225.3 23% 512 3100.7 4253.0 27% 1K 3271.8 4652.3 30% 8K 2460.9 3174.7 22% 16K 2267.4 2953.2 23% 32K 2222.9 2800.7 21% 64K 2204.3 2640.1 17% without patch with patch perf delta Quadrant mem 3400 2100 -38% GeekBench3 single-core 436 260 -40% multi-core 434 358 -18%I am wondering whether this is an known issue or not for this list. Thanks in advance.
Regards Yin, Fengwei _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android
Sorry. Had wrong email address for Yingshiuan.
Regards Yin, Fengwei
在 2015/7/3 11:53, Tom Gall 写道:
Hi Fengwei,
Thanks for the report. I think we would be interested in knowing the nature of the test being used.
I've added Bero to the CC as I'm sure he'll be interested as well.
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:35 PM, yfw fengwei.yin@linaro.org wrote:
Hi, About the patch http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/, we got an issue report from member. It could improve the micro benchmark but hurt general benchmark actually. Here is their test result:
bionic-benchmarks32 BM_string_memcpy: Size AOSP Linaro Perf Improvement 8 450.7 329.5 -37% 64 1715.7 2225.3 23% 512 3100.7 4253.0 27% 1K 3271.8 4652.3 30% 8K 2460.9 3174.7 22% 16K 2267.4 2953.2 23% 32K 2222.9 2800.7 21% 64K 2204.3 2640.1 17% without patch with patch perf delta Quadrant mem 3400 2100 -38% GeekBench3 single-core 436 260 -40% multi-core 434 358 -18%I am wondering whether this is an known issue or not for this list. Thanks in advance.
Regards Yin, Fengwei _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android
From their report, they used: Quadrant Professional(v2.1.1) GeekBench3 (v3.3.2)
I suppose the methodology to run these benchmarks is very known.
Regards Yin, Fengwei
在 2015/7/3 11:53, Tom Gall 写道:
Hi Fengwei,
Thanks for the report. I think we would be interested in knowing the nature of the test being used.
I've added Bero to the CC as I'm sure he'll be interested as well.
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:35 PM, yfw fengwei.yin@linaro.org wrote:
Hi, About the patch http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/, we got an issue report from member. It could improve the micro benchmark but hurt general benchmark actually. Here is their test result:
bionic-benchmarks32 BM_string_memcpy: Size AOSP Linaro Perf Improvement 8 450.7 329.5 -37% 64 1715.7 2225.3 23% 512 3100.7 4253.0 27% 1K 3271.8 4652.3 30% 8K 2460.9 3174.7 22% 16K 2267.4 2953.2 23% 32K 2222.9 2800.7 21% 64K 2204.3 2640.1 17% without patch with patch perf delta Quadrant mem 3400 2100 -38% GeekBench3 single-core 436 260 -40% multi-core 434 358 -18%I am wondering whether this is an known issue or not for this list. Thanks in advance.
Regards Yin, Fengwei _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android
Hi Fengwei,
Thanks for the report, there is a new revision here: https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ Although only single instruction is changed, someone said he did see measurable improvement. Would you give a try? I'll also run those benchmarks to see if I can reproduce the result.
btw, what is the platform you are using?
-- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan
2015-07-03 13:59 GMT+08:00 yfw fengwei.yin@linaro.org:
From their report, they used: Quadrant Professional(v2.1.1) GeekBench3 (v3.3.2)
I suppose the methodology to run these benchmarks is very known.
Regards Yin, Fengwei
在 2015/7/3 11:53, Tom Gall 写道:
Hi Fengwei,
Thanks for the report. I think we would be interested in knowing the nature of the test being used.
I've added Bero to the CC as I'm sure he'll be interested as well.
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:35 PM, yfw fengwei.yin@linaro.org wrote:
Hi, About the patch http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/, we got an issue report from member. It could improve the micro benchmark but hurt general benchmark actually. Here is their test result:
bionic-benchmarks32 BM_string_memcpy: Size AOSP Linaro Perf Improvement 8 450.7 329.5 -37% 64 1715.7 2225.3 23% 512 3100.7 4253.0 27% 1K 3271.8 4652.3 30% 8K 2460.9 3174.7 22% 16K 2267.4 2953.2 23% 32K 2222.9 2800.7 21% 64K 2204.3 2640.1 17% without patch with patch perf delta Quadrant mem 3400 2100 -38% GeekBench3 single-core 436 260 -40% multi-core 434 358 -18%I am wondering whether this is an known issue or not for this list. Thanks in advance.
Regards Yin, Fengwei _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android
linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android
Hi, Thanks. I don't have environment to try it. What about asking member help to try it after you get the test result for these two benchmarks?
Regards Yin, Fengwei
Hi Fengwei,
Thanks for the report, there is a new revision here: https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ Although only single instruction is changed, someone said he did see measurable improvement. Would you give a try? I'll also run those benchmarks to see if I can reproduce the result.
btw, what is the platform you are using?
-- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan
2015-07-03 13:59 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>:
From their report, they used: Quadrant Professional(v2.1.1) GeekBench3 (v3.3.2) I suppose the methodology to run these benchmarks is very known. Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 11:53, Tom Gall 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report. I think we would be interested in knowing the nature of the test being used. I've added Bero to the CC as I'm sure he'll be interested as well. On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:35 PM, yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> wrote: Hi, About the patch http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/, we got an issue report from member. It could improve the micro benchmark but hurt general benchmark actually. Here is their test result: bionic-benchmarks32 BM_string_memcpy: Size AOSP Linaro Perf Improvement 8 450.7 329.5 -37% 64 1715.7 2225.3 23% 512 3100.7 4253.0 27% 1K 3271.8 4652.3 30% 8K 2460.9 3174.7 22% 16K 2267.4 2953.2 23% 32K 2222.9 2800.7 21% 64K 2204.3 2640.1 17% without patch with patch perf delta Quadrant mem 3400 2100 -38% GeekBench3 single-core 436 260 -40% multi-core 434 358 -18% I am wondering whether this is an known issue or not for this list. Thanks in advance. Regards Yin, Fengwei _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android
Hi Yingshiuan, https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ is for memchr. while http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/ is for memcpy. Could you please double check whether you have correct link? Thanks.
Regards Yin, Fengwei
在 2015/7/3 14:04, Yingshiuan Pan 写道:
Hi Fengwei,
Thanks for the report, there is a new revision here: https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ Although only single instruction is changed, someone said he did see measurable improvement. Would you give a try? I'll also run those benchmarks to see if I can reproduce the result.
btw, what is the platform you are using?
-- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan
2015-07-03 13:59 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>:
From their report, they used: Quadrant Professional(v2.1.1) GeekBench3 (v3.3.2) I suppose the methodology to run these benchmarks is very known. Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 11:53, Tom Gall 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report. I think we would be interested in knowing the nature of the test being used. I've added Bero to the CC as I'm sure he'll be interested as well. On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:35 PM, yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> wrote: Hi, About the patch http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/, we got an issue report from member. It could improve the micro benchmark but hurt general benchmark actually. Here is their test result: bionic-benchmarks32 BM_string_memcpy: Size AOSP Linaro Perf Improvement 8 450.7 329.5 -37% 64 1715.7 2225.3 23% 512 3100.7 4253.0 27% 1K 3271.8 4652.3 30% 8K 2460.9 3174.7 22% 16K 2267.4 2953.2 23% 32K 2222.9 2800.7 21% 64K 2204.3 2640.1 17% without patch with patch perf delta Quadrant mem 3400 2100 -38% GeekBench3 single-core 436 260 -40% multi-core 434 358 -18% I am wondering whether this is an known issue or not for this list. Thanks in advance. Regards Yin, Fengwei _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android
Hi Fengwei Sorry, my carelessness, you're right.
-- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan
2015-07-03 19:51 GMT+08:00 yfw fengwei.yin@linaro.org:
Hi Yingshiuan, https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ is for memchr. while http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/ is for memcpy. Could you please double check whether you have correct link? Thanks.
Regards Yin, Fengwei
在 2015/7/3 14:04, Yingshiuan Pan 写道:
Hi Fengwei,
Thanks for the report, there is a new revision here: https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ Although only single instruction is changed, someone said he did see measurable improvement. Would you give a try? I'll also run those benchmarks to see if I can reproduce the result.
btw, what is the platform you are using?
-- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan
2015-07-03 13:59 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>:
From their report, they used: Quadrant Professional(v2.1.1) GeekBench3 (v3.3.2) I suppose the methodology to run these benchmarks is very known. Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 11:53, Tom Gall 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report. I think we would be interested in knowing the nature of the test being used. I've added Bero to the CC as I'm sure he'll be interested as well. On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:35 PM, yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> wrote: Hi, About the patch http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/, we got an issue report from member. It could improve the micro benchmark but hurt general benchmark actually. Here is their test result: bionic-benchmarks32 BM_string_memcpy: Size AOSP Linaro Perf Improvement 8 450.7 329.5 -37% 64 1715.7 2225.3 23% 512 3100.7 4253.0 27% 1K 3271.8 4652.3 30% 8K 2460.9 3174.7 22% 16K 2267.4 2953.2 23% 32K 2222.9 2800.7 21% 64K 2204.3 2640.1 17% without patch with patch perf delta Quadrant mem 3400 2100 -38% GeekBench3 single-core 436 260 -40% multi-core 434 358 -18% I am wondering whether this is an known issue or not for this list. Thanks in advance. Regards Yin, Fengwei _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android
Hi Yingshiuan, That's fine. Do we have updated patch for memcpy? Did you get the Quadrant/Geekbench3 data in your side? Thanks.
Regards Yin, Fengwei
On 2015年07月06日 09:24, Yingshiuan Pan wrote:
Hi Fengwei Sorry, my carelessness, you're right.
-- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan
2015-07-03 19:51 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>:
Hi Yingshiuan, https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ is for memchr. while http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/ is for memcpy. Could you please double check whether you have correct link? Thanks. Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 14:04, Yingshiuan Pan 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report, there is a new revision here: https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ Although only single instruction is changed, someone said he did see measurable improvement. Would you give a try? I'll also run those benchmarks to see if I can reproduce the result. btw, what is the platform you are using? -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-03 13:59 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>: From their report, they used: Quadrant Professional(v2.1.1) GeekBench3 (v3.3.2) I suppose the methodology to run these benchmarks is very known. Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 11:53, Tom Gall 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report. I think we would be interested in knowing the nature of the test being used. I've added Bero to the CC as I'm sure he'll be interested as well. On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:35 PM, yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>> wrote: Hi, About the patch http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/, we got an issue report from member. It could improve the micro benchmark but hurt general benchmark actually. Here is their test result: bionic-benchmarks32 BM_string_memcpy: Size AOSP Linaro Perf Improvement 8 450.7 329.5 -37% 64 1715.7 2225.3 23% 512 3100.7 4253.0 27% 1K 3271.8 4652.3 30% 8K 2460.9 3174.7 22% 16K 2267.4 2953.2 23% 32K 2222.9 2800.7 21% 64K 2204.3 2640.1 17% without patch with patch perf delta Quadrant mem 3400 2100 -38% GeekBench3 single-core 436 260 -40% multi-core 434 358 -18% I am wondering whether this is an known issue or not for this list. Thanks in advance. Regards Yin, Fengwei _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android
Spreadtrum submitted a ticket to track this issue: https://support.linaro.org/requests/1491
Hi Yingshiuan, Did you get chance to reproduce this in your side? Thanks.
Regards Yin, Fengwei
On 2015年07月03日 14:04, Yingshiuan Pan wrote:
Hi Fengwei,
Thanks for the report, there is a new revision here: https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ Although only single instruction is changed, someone said he did see measurable improvement. Would you give a try? I'll also run those benchmarks to see if I can reproduce the result.
btw, what is the platform you are using?
-- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan
2015-07-03 13:59 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>:
From their report, they used: Quadrant Professional(v2.1.1) GeekBench3 (v3.3.2) I suppose the methodology to run these benchmarks is very known. Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 11:53, Tom Gall 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report. I think we would be interested in knowing the nature of the test being used. I've added Bero to the CC as I'm sure he'll be interested as well. On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:35 PM, yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> wrote: Hi, About the patch http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/, we got an issue report from member. It could improve the micro benchmark but hurt general benchmark actually. Here is their test result: bionic-benchmarks32 BM_string_memcpy: Size AOSP Linaro Perf Improvement 8 450.7 329.5 -37% 64 1715.7 2225.3 23% 512 3100.7 4253.0 27% 1K 3271.8 4652.3 30% 8K 2460.9 3174.7 22% 16K 2267.4 2953.2 23% 32K 2222.9 2800.7 21% 64K 2204.3 2640.1 17% without patch with patch perf delta Quadrant mem 3400 2100 -38% GeekBench3 single-core 436 260 -40% multi-core 434 358 -18% I am wondering whether this is an known issue or not for this list. Thanks in advance. Regards Yin, Fengwei _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android
Hi Fengwei,
I did not see such big performance regression on Juno, followings are my result:
geekbench 3.3.2: single multi w/o opt. memcpy 857 2221 with opt. memcpy 855 2263 performance gain -0.2% 1.9%
Quadrant 2.1 w/o opt. memcpy 9662 with opt. memcpy 9563 performance gain -1.0%
-- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan
2015-07-06 11:16 GMT+08:00 yfw fengwei.yin@linaro.org:
Hi Yingshiuan, That's fine. Do we have updated patch for memcpy? Did you get the Quadrant/Geekbench3 data in your side? Thanks.
Regards Yin, Fengwei
On 2015年07月06日 09:24, Yingshiuan Pan wrote:
Hi Fengwei Sorry, my carelessness, you're right.
-- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan
2015-07-03 19:51 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>:
Hi Yingshiuan, https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ is for memchr. while http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/ is for memcpy. Couldyou please double check whether you have correct link? Thanks.
Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 14:04, Yingshiuan Pan 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report, there is a new revision here: https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ Although only single instruction is changed, someone said he didsee measurable improvement. Would you give a try? I'll also run those benchmarks to see if I can reproduce the result.
btw, what is the platform you are using? -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-03 13:59 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>: From their report, they used: Quadrant Professional(v2.1.1) GeekBench3 (v3.3.2) I suppose the methodology to run these benchmarks is very known. Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 11:53, Tom Gall 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report. I think we would be interested in knowing the nature of the test being used. I've added Bero to the CC as I'm sure he'll be interested as well. On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:35 PM, yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>> wrote: Hi, About the patch http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/, we got an issue report from member. It could improve themicro benchmark but hurt general benchmark actually. Here is their test result:
bionic-benchmarks32 BM_string_memcpy: Size AOSP Linaro Perf Improvement 8 450.7 329.5 -37% 64 1715.7 2225.3 23% 512 3100.7 4253.0 27% 1K 3271.8 4652.3 30% 8K 2460.9 3174.7 22% 16K 2267.4 2953.2 23% 32K 2222.9 2800.7 21% 64K 2204.3 2640.1 17% without patch with patch perf delta Quadrant mem 3400 2100-38% GeekBench3 single-core 436 260 -40% multi-core 434 358 -18%
I am wondering whether this is an known issue or not for this list. Thanks in advance. Regards Yin, Fengwei _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android
Hi Yingshiuan, What kind of cpu arch is Juno? Here is the info shared from Spreadtrum about their core: Cortex-A7 with NEON. # cat /proc/cpuinfo Processor : ARMv7 Processor rev 5 (v7l) processor : 0 model name : ARMv7 Processor rev 5 (v7l) BogoMIPS : 1548.16 Features : swp half thumb fastmult vfp edsp neon vfpv3 tls vfpv4 idiva idivt vfpd32 CPU implementer : 0x41 CPU architecture: 7 CPU variant : 0x0 CPU part : 0xc07 CPU revision : 5 ... ...
Regards Yin, Fengwei
On 2015年07月07日 11:11, Yingshiuan Pan wrote:
Hi Fengwei,
I did not see such big performance regression on Juno, followings are my result:
geekbench 3.3.2: single multi w/o opt. memcpy 857 2221 with opt. memcpy 855 2263 performance gain -0.2% 1.9%
Quadrant 2.1 w/o opt. memcpy 9662 with opt. memcpy 9563 performance gain -1.0%
-- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan
2015-07-06 11:16 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>:
Hi Yingshiuan, That's fine. Do we have updated patch for memcpy? Did you get the Quadrant/Geekbench3 data in your side? Thanks. Regards Yin, Fengwei On 2015年07月06日 09:24, Yingshiuan Pan wrote: Hi Fengwei Sorry, my carelessness, you're right. -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-03 19:51 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>: Hi Yingshiuan, https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ is for memchr. while http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/ is for memcpy. Could you please double check whether you have correct link? Thanks. Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 14:04, Yingshiuan Pan 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report, there is a new revision here: https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ Although only single instruction is changed, someone said he did see measurable improvement. Would you give a try? I'll also run those benchmarks to see if I can reproduce the result. btw, what is the platform you are using? -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-03 13:59 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>>: From their report, they used: Quadrant Professional(v2.1.1) GeekBench3 (v3.3.2) I suppose the methodology to run these benchmarks is very known. Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 11:53, Tom Gall 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report. I think we would be interested in knowing the nature of the test being used. I've added Bero to the CC as I'm sure he'll be interested as well. On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:35 PM, yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>> wrote: Hi, About the patch http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/, we got an issue report from member. It could improve the micro benchmark but hurt general benchmark actually. Here is their test result: bionic-benchmarks32 BM_string_memcpy: Size AOSP Linaro Perf Improvement 8 450.7 329.5 -37% 64 1715.7 2225.3 23% 512 3100.7 4253.0 27% 1K 3271.8 4652.3 30% 8K 2460.9 3174.7 22% 16K 2267.4 2953.2 23% 32K 2222.9 2800.7 21% 64K 2204.3 2640.1 17% without patch with patch perf delta Quadrant mem 3400 2100 -38% GeekBench3 single-core 436 260 -40% multi-core 434 358 -18% I am wondering whether this is an known issue or not for this list. Thanks in advance. Regards Yin, Fengwei _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android
aarch64, CA57*2 + CA53*4
well, I think I should rerun the benchmarks with 32-bit android
-- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan
2015-07-07 11:33 GMT+08:00 yfw fengwei.yin@linaro.org:
Hi Yingshiuan, What kind of cpu arch is Juno? Here is the info shared from Spreadtrum about their core: Cortex-A7 with NEON. # cat /proc/cpuinfo Processor : ARMv7 Processor rev 5 (v7l) processor : 0 model name : ARMv7 Processor rev 5 (v7l) BogoMIPS : 1548.16 Features : swp half thumb fastmult vfp edsp neon vfpv3 tls vfpv4 idiva idivt vfpd32 CPU implementer : 0x41 CPU architecture: 7 CPU variant : 0x0 CPU part : 0xc07 CPU revision : 5 ... ...
Regards Yin, Fengwei
On 2015年07月07日 11:11, Yingshiuan Pan wrote:
Hi Fengwei,
I did not see such big performance regression on Juno, followings are my result:
geekbench 3.3.2: single multi w/o opt. memcpy 857 2221 with opt. memcpy 855 2263 performance gain -0.2% 1.9%
Quadrant 2.1 w/o opt. memcpy 9662 with opt. memcpy 9563 performance gain -1.0%
-- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan
2015-07-06 11:16 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>:
Hi Yingshiuan, That's fine. Do we have updated patch for memcpy? Did you get the Quadrant/Geekbench3 data in your side? Thanks. Regards Yin, Fengwei On 2015年07月06日 09:24, Yingshiuan Pan wrote: Hi Fengwei Sorry, my carelessness, you're right. -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-03 19:51 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>: Hi Yingshiuan, https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ is formemchr. while http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/ is for memcpy. Could you please double check whether you have correct link? Thanks.
Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 14:04, Yingshiuan Pan 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report, there is a new revision here: https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ Although only single instruction is changed, someone said he did see measurable improvement. Would you give a try? I'll also run those benchmarks to see if I can reproduce the result. btw, what is the platform you are using? -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-03 13:59 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>>: From their report, they used: Quadrant Professional(v2.1.1) GeekBench3 (v3.3.2) I suppose the methodology to run these benchmarks is very known. Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 11:53, Tom Gall 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report. I think we would be interested in knowing the nature of the test being used. I've added Bero to the CC as I'm sure he'll be interested as well. On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:35 PM, yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>> wrote: Hi, About the patch http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/, we got an issue report from member. It could improve the micro benchmark but hurt general benchmark actually. Here is their test result: bionic-benchmarks32 BM_string_memcpy: Size AOSP Linaro Perf Improvement 8 450.7 329.5 -37% 64 1715.7 2225.3 23% 512 3100.7 4253.0 27% 1K 3271.8 4652.3 30% 8K 2460.9 3174.7 22% 16K 2267.4 2953.2 23% 32K 2222.9 2800.7 21% 64K 2204.3 2640.1 17% without patch with patch perf delta Quadrant mem 3400 2100 -38% GeekBench3 single-core 436 260 -40% multi-core 434 358 -18% I am wondering whether this is an known issue or not for this list. Thanks in advance. Regards Yin, Fengwei _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android
On 07/07/15 04:38, Yingshiuan Pan wrote:
aarch64, CA57*2 + CA53*4
well, I think I should rerun the benchmarks with 32-bit android
memcpy() performance can be very sensitive to CPU micro-architecture.
Out of interest how many 32-bit Android reference platforms do you work with (and do any use C-A7 cores)?
Daniel.
-- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan
2015-07-07 11:33 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>:
Hi Yingshiuan, What kind of cpu arch is Juno? Here is the info shared from Spreadtrum about their core: Cortex-A7 with NEON. # cat /proc/cpuinfo Processor : ARMv7 Processor rev 5 (v7l) processor : 0 model name : ARMv7 Processor rev 5 (v7l) BogoMIPS : 1548.16 Features : swp half thumb fastmult vfp edsp neon vfpv3 tls vfpv4 idiva idivt vfpd32 CPU implementer : 0x41 CPU architecture: 7 CPU variant : 0x0 CPU part : 0xc07 CPU revision : 5 ... ... Regards Yin, Fengwei On 2015年07月07日 11:11, Yingshiuan Pan wrote: Hi Fengwei, I did not see such big performance regression on Juno, followings are my result: geekbench 3.3.2: single multi w/o opt. memcpy 857 2221 with opt. memcpy 855 2263 performance gain -0.2% 1.9% Quadrant 2.1 w/o opt. memcpy 9662 with opt. memcpy 9563 performance gain -1.0% -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-06 11:16 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>: Hi Yingshiuan, That's fine. Do we have updated patch for memcpy? Did you get the Quadrant/Geekbench3 data in your side? Thanks. Regards Yin, Fengwei On 2015年07月06日 09:24, Yingshiuan Pan wrote: Hi Fengwei Sorry, my carelessness, you're right. -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-03 19:51 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>>: Hi Yingshiuan, https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ is for memchr. while http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/ is for memcpy. Could you please double check whether you have correct link? Thanks. Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 14:04, Yingshiuan Pan 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report, there is a new revision here: https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ Although only single instruction is changed, someone said he did see measurable improvement. Would you give a try? I'll also run those benchmarks to see if I can reproduce the result. btw, what is the platform you are using? -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-03 13:59 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>>>: From their report, they used: Quadrant Professional(v2.1.1) GeekBench3 (v3.3.2) I suppose the methodology to run these benchmarks is very known. Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 11:53, Tom Gall 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report. I think we would be interested in knowing the nature of the test being used. I've added Bero to the CC as I'm sure he'll be interested as well. On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:35 PM, yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>>> wrote: Hi, About the patch http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/, we got an issue report from member. It could improve the micro benchmark but hurt general benchmark actually. Here is their test result: bionic-benchmarks32 BM_string_memcpy: Size AOSP Linaro Perf Improvement 8 450.7 329.5 -37% 64 1715.7 2225.3 23% 512 3100.7 4253.0 27% 1K 3271.8 4652.3 30% 8K 2460.9 3174.7 22% 16K 2267.4 2953.2 23% 32K 2222.9 2800.7 21% 64K 2204.3 2640.1 17% without patch with patch perf delta Quadrant mem 3400 2100 -38% GeekBench3 single-core 436 260 -40% multi-core 434 358 -18% I am wondering whether this is an known issue or not for this list. Thanks in advance. Regards Yin, Fengwei _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android
linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android
Hi Yingshiuan, Did you get the test result of 32bit android? Thanks.
Regards Yin, Fengwei
aarch64, CA57*2 + CA53*4
well, I think I should rerun the benchmarks with 32-bit android
-- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan
2015-07-07 11:33 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>:
Hi Yingshiuan, What kind of cpu arch is Juno? Here is the info shared from Spreadtrum about their core: Cortex-A7 with NEON. # cat /proc/cpuinfo Processor : ARMv7 Processor rev 5 (v7l) processor : 0 model name : ARMv7 Processor rev 5 (v7l) BogoMIPS : 1548.16 Features : swp half thumb fastmult vfp edsp neon vfpv3 tls vfpv4 idiva idivt vfpd32 CPU implementer : 0x41 CPU architecture: 7 CPU variant : 0x0 CPU part : 0xc07 CPU revision : 5 ... ... Regards Yin, Fengwei On 2015年07月07日 11:11, Yingshiuan Pan wrote: Hi Fengwei, I did not see such big performance regression on Juno, followings are my result: geekbench 3.3.2: single multi w/o opt. memcpy 857 2221 with opt. memcpy 855 2263 performance gain -0.2% 1.9% Quadrant 2.1 w/o opt. memcpy 9662 with opt. memcpy 9563 performance gain -1.0% -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-06 11:16 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>: Hi Yingshiuan, That's fine. Do we have updated patch for memcpy? Did you get the Quadrant/Geekbench3 data in your side? Thanks. Regards Yin, Fengwei On 2015年07月06日 09:24, Yingshiuan Pan wrote: Hi Fengwei Sorry, my carelessness, you're right. -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-03 19:51 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>>: Hi Yingshiuan, https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ is for memchr. while http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/ is for memcpy. Could you please double check whether you have correct link? Thanks. Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 14:04, Yingshiuan Pan 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report, there is a new revision here: https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ Although only single instruction is changed, someone said he did see measurable improvement. Would you give a try? I'll also run those benchmarks to see if I can reproduce the result. btw, what is the platform you are using? -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-03 13:59 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>>>: From their report, they used: Quadrant Professional(v2.1.1) GeekBench3 (v3.3.2) I suppose the methodology to run these benchmarks is very known. Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 11:53, Tom Gall 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report. I think we would be interested in knowing the nature of the test being used. I've added Bero to the CC as I'm sure he'll be interested as well. On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:35 PM, yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>>> wrote: Hi, About the patch http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/, we got an issue report from member. It could improve the micro benchmark but hurt general benchmark actually. Here is their test result: bionic-benchmarks32 BM_string_memcpy: Size AOSP Linaro Perf Improvement 8 450.7 329.5 -37% 64 1715.7 2225.3 23% 512 3100.7 4253.0 27% 1K 3271.8 4652.3 30% 8K 2460.9 3174.7 22% 16K 2267.4 2953.2 23% 32K 2222.9 2800.7 21% 64K 2204.3 2640.1 17% without patch with patch perf delta Quadrant mem 3400 2100 -38% GeekBench3 single-core 436 260 -40% multi-core 434 358 -18% I am wondering whether this is an known issue or not for this list. Thanks in advance. Regards Yin, Fengwei _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android
Hi,
Android-32b on Juno: All tests were ran 2 times and calculated average.
geekbench single multi w/o opt. memcpy 849 2191 with opt. memcpy 848 2222 performance gain -0.1% 1.4%
Quadrant 2.1 w/o opt. memcpy 8588 with opt. memcpy 8574 performance gain -0.1%
-- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan
2015-07-11 18:00 GMT+08:00 yfw fengwei.yin@linaro.org:
Hi Yingshiuan, Did you get the test result of 32bit android? Thanks.
Regards Yin, Fengwei
aarch64, CA57*2 + CA53*4
well, I think I should rerun the benchmarks with 32-bit android
-- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan
2015-07-07 11:33 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>:
Hi Yingshiuan, What kind of cpu arch is Juno? Here is the info shared from Spreadtrum about their core: Cortex-A7 with NEON. # cat /proc/cpuinfo Processor : ARMv7 Processor rev 5 (v7l) processor : 0 model name : ARMv7 Processor rev 5 (v7l) BogoMIPS : 1548.16 Features : swp half thumb fastmult vfp edsp neon vfpv3 tls vfpv4 idiva idivt vfpd32 CPU implementer : 0x41 CPU architecture: 7 CPU variant : 0x0 CPU part : 0xc07 CPU revision : 5 ... ... Regards Yin, Fengwei On 2015年07月07日 11:11, Yingshiuan Pan wrote: Hi Fengwei, I did not see such big performance regression on Juno, followings are my result: geekbench 3.3.2: single multi w/o opt. memcpy 857 2221 with opt. memcpy 855 2263 performance gain -0.2% 1.9% Quadrant 2.1 w/o opt. memcpy 9662 with opt. memcpy 9563 performance gain -1.0% -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-06 11:16 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>: Hi Yingshiuan, That's fine. Do we have updated patch for memcpy? Did you get the Quadrant/Geekbench3 data in your side? Thanks. Regards Yin, Fengwei On 2015年07月06日 09:24, Yingshiuan Pan wrote: Hi Fengwei Sorry, my carelessness, you're right. -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-03 19:51 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>>: Hi Yingshiuan, https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ is formemchr. while http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/ is for memcpy. Could you please double check whether you have correct link? Thanks.
Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 14:04, Yingshiuan Pan 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report, there is a new revision here: https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ Although only single instruction is changed, someone said he did see measurable improvement. Would you give a try? I'll also run those benchmarks to see if I can reproduce the result. btw, what is the platform you are using? -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-03 13:59 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>>>: From their report, they used: Quadrant Professional(v2.1.1) GeekBench3 (v3.3.2) I suppose the methodology to run these benchmarks is very known. Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 11:53, Tom Gall 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report. I think we would be interested in knowing the nature of the test being used. I've added Bero to the CC as I'm sure he'll be interested as well. On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:35 PM, yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>>> wrote: Hi, About the patch http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/, we got an issue report from member. Itcould improve the micro benchmark but hurt general benchmark actually. Here is their test result:
bionic-benchmarks32 BM_string_memcpy: Size AOSP Linaro Perf Improvement 8 450.7 329.5 -37% 64 1715.7 2225.3 23% 512 3100.7 4253.0 27% 1K 3271.8 4652.3 30% 8K 2460.9 3174.7 22% 16K 2267.4 2953.2 23% 32K 2222.9 2800.7 21% 64K 2204.3 2640.1 17% without patch with patch perf delta Quadrant mem 3400 2100 -38% GeekBench3 single-core 436 260 -40% multi-core 434 358 -18% I am wondering whether this is an known issue or not for this list. Thanks in advance. Regards Yin, Fengwei _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android
It's too bad this data couldn't be gathered on "true" 32 bit cores like say A7s
This would be a direct comparison to Spreadtrum's hardware.
:-/
On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 9:16 PM, Yingshiuan Pan yingshiuan.pan@linaro.org wrote:
Hi,
Android-32b on Juno: All tests were ran 2 times and calculated average.
geekbench single multi w/o opt. memcpy 849 2191 with opt. memcpy 848 2222 performance gain -0.1% 1.4%
Quadrant 2.1 w/o opt. memcpy 8588 with opt. memcpy 8574 performance gain -0.1%
-- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan
2015-07-11 18:00 GMT+08:00 yfw fengwei.yin@linaro.org:
Hi Yingshiuan, Did you get the test result of 32bit android? Thanks.
Regards Yin, Fengwei
aarch64, CA57*2 + CA53*4
well, I think I should rerun the benchmarks with 32-bit android
-- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan
2015-07-07 11:33 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>:
Hi Yingshiuan, What kind of cpu arch is Juno? Here is the info shared fromSpreadtrum about their core: Cortex-A7 with NEON. # cat /proc/cpuinfo Processor : ARMv7 Processor rev 5 (v7l) processor : 0 model name : ARMv7 Processor rev 5 (v7l) BogoMIPS : 1548.16 Features : swp half thumb fastmult vfp edsp neon vfpv3 tls vfpv4 idiva idivt vfpd32 CPU implementer : 0x41 CPU architecture: 7 CPU variant : 0x0 CPU part : 0xc07 CPU revision : 5 ... ...
Regards Yin, Fengwei On 2015年07月07日 11:11, Yingshiuan Pan wrote: Hi Fengwei, I did not see such big performance regression on Juno, followings are my result: geekbench 3.3.2: single multi w/o opt. memcpy 857 2221 with opt. memcpy 855 2263 performance gain -0.2% 1.9% Quadrant 2.1 w/o opt. memcpy 9662 with opt. memcpy 9563 performance gain -1.0% -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-06 11:16 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>: Hi Yingshiuan, That's fine. Do we have updated patch for memcpy? Did you get the Quadrant/Geekbench3 data in your side? Thanks. Regards Yin, Fengwei On 2015年07月06日 09:24, Yingshiuan Pan wrote: Hi Fengwei Sorry, my carelessness, you're right. -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-03 19:51 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>>: Hi Yingshiuan, https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ is formemchr. while http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/ is for memcpy. Could you please double check whether you have correct link? Thanks.
Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 14:04, Yingshiuan Pan 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report, there is a new revision here: https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ Although only single instruction is changed, someone said he did see measurable improvement. Would you give a try? I'll also run those benchmarks to see if I can reproduce the result. btw, what is the platform you are using? -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-03 13:59 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>>>: From their report, they used: Quadrant Professional(v2.1.1) GeekBench3 (v3.3.2) I suppose the methodology to run these benchmarks is very known. Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 11:53, Tom Gall 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report. I think we would be interested in knowing the nature of the test being used. I've added Bero to the CC as I'm sure he'll be interested as well. On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:35 PM, yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>>> wrote: Hi, About the patch http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/, we got an issue report from member. Itcould improve the micro benchmark but hurt general benchmark actually. Here is their test result:
bionic-benchmarks32 BM_string_memcpy: Size AOSP Linaro Perf Improvement 8 450.7 329.5 -37% 64 1715.7 2225.3 23% 512 3100.7 4253.0 27% 1K 3271.8 4652.3 30% 8K 2460.9 3174.7 22% 16K 2267.4 2953.2 23% 32K 2222.9 2800.7 21% 64K 2204.3 2640.1 17% without patch with patch perf delta Quadrant mem 3400 2100 -38% GeekBench3 single-core 436 260 -40% multi-core 434 358 -18% I am wondering whether this is an known issue or not for this list. Thanks in advance. Regards Yin, Fengwei _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android
On 13/07/15 09:33, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
On Sun, 2015-07-12 at 21:29 -0500, Tom Gall wrote:
It's too bad this data couldn't be gathered on "true" 32 bit cores like say A7s
Like by using TC2 (or other big.LITTLE board) with the A15 cores offlined. (Or A7 cores offlined if you want to test A15 performance).
This exactly matches my thoughts. Surely TC2 remains a reference platform for LCR?
big.LITTLE platforms are especially good targets for reference builds because they can be benchmarked in all three modes and hence get better microarchitectural coverage.
Daniel.
Hi Yingshiuan, I trid the patch by using the platfrom from Spreadtrum based on Spreadtrum 32bit android member build and got:
Without opt patch: GeekBench: single core Multi-core 348 1041 346 1020 348 1020
Quadrant mem: 2545 2449 2452 2170 2569 2454 2446
With opt patch: GeekBench: single core Multi-core 344 965 347 1031 345 1011 348 1053 345 1031
Quadrant mem: 1724 1715 1779 1751 1713
Regards Yin, Fengwei
On 2015/7/7 11:11, Yingshiuan Pan wrote:
Hi Fengwei,
I did not see such big performance regression on Juno, followings are my result:
geekbench 3.3.2: single multi w/o opt. memcpy 857 2221 with opt. memcpy 855 2263 performance gain -0.2% 1.9%
Quadrant 2.1 w/o opt. memcpy 9662 with opt. memcpy 9563 performance gain -1.0%
-- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan
2015-07-06 11:16 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>:
Hi Yingshiuan, That's fine. Do we have updated patch for memcpy? Did you get the Quadrant/Geekbench3 data in your side? Thanks. Regards Yin, Fengwei On 2015年07月06日 09:24, Yingshiuan Pan wrote: Hi Fengwei Sorry, my carelessness, you're right. -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-03 19:51 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>: Hi Yingshiuan, https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ is for memchr. while http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/ is for memcpy. Could you please double check whether you have correct link? Thanks. Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 14:04, Yingshiuan Pan 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report, there is a new revision here: https://android-review.googlesource.com/#/c/147915/ Although only single instruction is changed, someone said he did see measurable improvement. Would you give a try? I'll also run those benchmarks to see if I can reproduce the result. btw, what is the platform you are using? -- 潘穎軒 Yingshiuan (Peter) Pan 2015-07-03 13:59 GMT+08:00 yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>>: From their report, they used: Quadrant Professional(v2.1.1) GeekBench3 (v3.3.2) I suppose the methodology to run these benchmarks is very known. Regards Yin, Fengwei 在 2015/7/3 11:53, Tom Gall 写道: Hi Fengwei, Thanks for the report. I think we would be interested in knowing the nature of the test being used. I've added Bero to the CC as I'm sure he'll be interested as well. On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:35 PM, yfw <fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org> <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org <mailto:fengwei.yin@linaro.org>>>> wrote: Hi, About the patch http://review.android.git.linaro.org/#/c/15529/, we got an issue report from member. It could improve the micro benchmark but hurt general benchmark actually. Here is their test result: bionic-benchmarks32 BM_string_memcpy: Size AOSP Linaro Perf Improvement 8 450.7 329.5 -37% 64 1715.7 2225.3 23% 512 3100.7 4253.0 27% 1K 3271.8 4652.3 30% 8K 2460.9 3174.7 22% 16K 2267.4 2953.2 23% 32K 2222.9 2800.7 21% 64K 2204.3 2640.1 17% without patch with patch perf delta Quadrant mem 3400 2100 -38% GeekBench3 single-core 436 260 -40% multi-core 434 358 -18% I am wondering whether this is an known issue or not for this list. Thanks in advance. Regards Yin, Fengwei _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android _______________________________________________ linaro-android mailing list linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org <mailto:linaro-android@lists.linaro.org>>> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-android
linaro-android@lists.linaro.org
-
Daniel Thompson -
Jon Medhurst (Tixy) -
Tom Gall -
yfw -
Yingshiuan Pan