Re: CP15 Barrier emulation performance?

2017-07-28 Thread Gene Heskett
On Friday 28 July 2017 07:54:43 Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 08:30:30AM +, Riku Voipio wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 09:45:49AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > On Tue, 2017-07-11 at 08:56 +0100, Edmund Grimley Evans wrote: > > > > > Does this emulation take a

Re: CP15 Barrier emulation performance?

2017-07-28 Thread Adrian Bunk
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 08:30:30AM +, Riku Voipio wrote: > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 09:45:49AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Tue, 2017-07-11 at 08:56 +0100, Edmund Grimley Evans wrote: > > > > Does this emulation take a considerable performance hit, as opposed > > > > to > > > > running on

Re: CP15 Barrier emulation performance?

2017-07-28 Thread Riku Voipio
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 09:45:49AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Tue, 2017-07-11 at 08:56 +0100, Edmund Grimley Evans wrote: > > > Does this emulation take a considerable performance hit, as opposed > > > to > > > running on armhf hardware/kernel, where the instruction doesn't > > > appear > > >

Re: CP15 Barrier emulation performance?

2017-07-27 Thread Vagrant Cascadian
On 2017-07-27, Riku Voipio wrote: > On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 12:51:08PM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: >> Some of the reproducible builds armhf nodes are actually arm64 capable >> machines, running an arm64 kernel build. When haskell related packages >> get built, I get a tremendous number of

Re: CP15 Barrier emulation performance?

2017-07-27 Thread Riku Voipio
On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 12:51:08PM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > Some of the reproducible builds armhf nodes are actually arm64 capable > machines, running an arm64 kernel build. When haskell related packages > get built, I get a tremendous number of messages on to the console: > > "ghc"

Re: CP15 Barrier emulation performance?

2017-07-11 Thread Ian Campbell
On Tue, 2017-07-11 at 08:56 +0100, Edmund Grimley Evans wrote: > > Does this emulation take a considerable performance hit, as opposed > > to > > running on armhf hardware/kernel, where the instruction doesn't > > appear > > to be listed as deprecated? > > I'd expect the kernel-emulated

Re: CP15 Barrier emulation performance?

2017-07-11 Thread Edmund Grimley Evans
> Does this emulation take a considerable performance hit, as opposed to > running on armhf hardware/kernel, where the instruction doesn't appear > to be listed as deprecated? I'd expect the kernel-emulated instruction to be much slower than any non-emulated instruction, but the overall effect on

Re: CP15 Barrier emulation performance?

2017-07-10 Thread Alan Corey
I wouldn't take the message too seriously, just Google it: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22uses+deprecated+CP15+Barrier+instruction%22=utf-8=utf-8 On 7/5/17, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > Some of the reproducible builds armhf nodes are actually arm64 capable > machines,

CP15 Barrier emulation performance?

2017-07-10 Thread Vagrant Cascadian
Some of the reproducible builds armhf nodes are actually arm64 capable machines, running an arm64 kernel build. When haskell related packages get built, I get a tremendous number of messages on to the console: "ghc" (13126) uses deprecated CP15 Barrier instruction at 0xefadd224 In the