Re: [PATCH v10 3/4] x86, mce: Add __mcsafe_copy()

[Luck, Tony]

On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 11:58:43AM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> But one could take out that function do some microbenchmarking with
> different sizes and once with the current version and once with the
> pushes and pops of r1[2-5] to see where the breakeven is.

On a 4K page copy from a source address that isn't in the
cache I see all sorts of answers.

On my desktop (i7-3960X) it is ~50 cycles slower to push and pop the four
registers.

On my latest Xeon - I can't post benchmarks ... but also a bit slower.

On an older Xeon it is a few cycles faster (but even though I'm
looking at the median of 10,000 runs I see more run-to-run variation
that I see difference between register choices.

Here's what I tested:

	push %r12
	push %r13
	push %r14
	push %r15

	/* Loop copying whole cache lines */
1:	movq (%rsi),%r8
2:	movq 1*8(%rsi),%r9
3:	movq 2*8(%rsi),%r10
4:	movq 3*8(%rsi),%r11
9:	movq 4*8(%rsi),%r12
10:	movq 5*8(%rsi),%r13
11:	movq 6*8(%rsi),%r14
12:	movq 7*8(%rsi),%r15
	movq %r8,(%rdi)
	movq %r9,1*8(%rdi)
	movq %r10,2*8(%rdi)
	movq %r11,3*8(%rdi)
	movq %r12,4*8(%rdi)
	movq %r13,5*8(%rdi)
	movq %r14,6*8(%rdi)
	movq %r15,7*8(%rdi)
	leaq 64(%rsi),%rsi
	leaq 64(%rdi),%rdi
	decl %ecx
	jnz 1b

	pop %r15
	pop %r14
	pop %r13
	pop %r12
-Tony