Re: RFC: Petition Intel/AMD to add POPF_IF insn

From: Paolo Bonzini
Date: Thu Aug 18 2016 - 22:09:17 EST




On 18/08/2016 14:18, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>
> - 2,588,839,023 branches # 977.555
> M/sec ( +- 0.02% )
> + 2,599,319,615 branches # 1046.786
> M/sec ( +- 0.04% )
> - 3,620,273 branch-misses # 0.14% of all
> branches ( +- 0.67% )
> + 3,577,771 branch-misses # 0.14% of all
> branches ( +- 0.69% )
> - 2.648799072 seconds time
> elapsed ( +- 0.24% )
> + 2.487452268 seconds time
> elapsed ( +- 0.31% )
>
> Good, we run more insns/cycle, as expected. However, a bit more branches.

Can you see where the missed branches are? Assuming branch misses are
the case where IF=0, perhaps there are a few places that can be changed
to spin_lock/unlock_irq or local_irq_disable/enable.

Paolo