| Re: [hatari-devel] Hatari on constrained devices |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/hatari-devel Archives
]
- To: hatari-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [hatari-devel] Hatari on constrained devices
- From: Christian Zietz <czietz@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2022 16:18:53 +0100
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1642346334; bh=/9kuJPqNYZquGfpHRTkjPED371WtrHNHynhnXo4MKhs=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Date:To:References:From:Subject:In-Reply-To; b=kGemJZ1bybhXuzqtYjVqfeSpxQnaC8Nveoi7zfx949220vihzFhPF6gsig7ReTmA9 Hya+095UBVI0GFVlGWvF8+HezFwZkPyfJa4BMavlXLEq4wQ8F23eHGyBGyA4d6qXZz vBz+DDEfCylPH3eeEIwUX+Q8O+B79o/tDcaJjQHg=
Thomas Huth schrieb:
It's not measurable on modern CPUs.
I would agree to that.
Linux developers seem to look down on other platforms, because Linux has
the incredible "perf" tool. So, why not use it, I thought?
This is on a Raspberry Pi 400, certainly a less powerful CPU than in a
current PC. Somehow inspired by the command used during the EmuTOS
tests, I ran...
SDL_VIDEODRIVER=dummy SDL_AUDIODRIVER=dummy perf stat -e cycles -r 10
hatari --log-level fatal --sound off --fast-forward on --run-vbls 400
--fast-boot on --tos etos512de.img
.... to measure the amount of ARM CPU cycles spent, without any video or
audio output overhead. These are the average values and standard
deviations for 10 repetitions ("-r 10") respectively:
ENABLE_SMALL_MEM=0
3,333,167,644 cycles ( +- 0.45% )
ENABLE_SMALL_MEM=1
3,267,861,361 cycles ( +- 0.53% )
Therefore, ENABLE_SMALL_MEM=1 even seems to be (very marginally) faster
in this test!
Regards
Christian
--
Christian Zietz - CHZ-Soft - czietz@xxxxxxx
WWW: https://www.chzsoft.de/
PGP/GnuPG-Key-ID: 0x52CB97F66DA025CA / 0x6DA025CA