From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from SNT004-OMC4S34.hotmail.com (snt004-omc4s34.hotmail.com [65.55.90.237]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBB3580373 for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 22:18:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from NAM03-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([65.55.90.200]) by SNT004-OMC4S34.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(7.5.7601.23008); Wed, 8 Mar 2017 22:18:46 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hotmail.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=WeJMZ/zTlCMnnU/jiB/iYN+x3NWdu2dU8ujfaN5S58M=; b=KngEPGKeH7dcO8iK/ncEMy9aaIc3t7teC9yNwqKu8DqWvkuxYY1TMHZ2XssEw4dg1NB+N6vZMPsq/moueregr356wfhF70aXykL7Jq5GZQuv5IvQkv4ZqjZhDTkkYV9svsKY4nEd7eQUT+xV9PCmQ5Bk0Ab3AhvR6MtAmawo2zakZvHEmSUKAPbDXhV6E/8lfxWvyW2b8it8o5t3PiEBD6MoILtT90hRei7fGt+CQD1gDUo6uORJ2DJDCAWiBLfcLHt/NtuDfVFY81zt7VDyFMVJ0AE00oNrnFADSrA0/obR6BG9pbX+xtdwZqixiYPGqTPJWqX9mWXj2xURhb0+xQ== Received: from BY2NAM03FT055.eop-NAM03.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.84.54) by BY2NAM03HT004.eop-NAM03.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.84.106) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.961.10; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 06:18:44 +0000 Received: from BN6PR11MB1811.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.152.84.58) by BY2NAM03FT055.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.85.245) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.961.10 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 06:18:44 +0000 Received: from BN6PR11MB1811.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([10.175.99.139]) by BN6PR11MB1811.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([10.175.99.139]) with mapi id 15.01.0947.020; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 06:18:44 +0000 From: Amit kumar To: Ken Taylor , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" Thread-Topic: [edk2] SIMD Instruction supported in UEFI? Thread-Index: AQHSmGKxWNdCLecC10GbsaIjdC6alaGMCPMM Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 06:18:44 +0000 Message-ID: References: , <6474ce0dd97147ba9eef6652fbc64529@SCL-EXCHMB-13.phoenix.com> In-Reply-To: <6474ce0dd97147ba9eef6652fbc64529@SCL-EXCHMB-13.phoenix.com> Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: phoenix.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;phoenix.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=hotmail.com; x-incomingtopheadermarker: OriginalChecksum:8E5B53748633F582F9F44B8A3BECB38165ADE885452CE971B396422DDE666E12; UpperCasedChecksum:6CC47C4DC2B8B40F5F2C2844A4BF606DAFDDF265CA128E4A1109B8220F1FD416; SizeAsReceived:7879; Count:39 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-tmn: [yq6r0u0EJXJMyQ8Ofla0kEGqDeKQpWQM] x-incomingheadercount: 39 x-eopattributedmessage: 0 x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY2NAM03HT004; 5:KNElwTKFVesDwQhY2OOmN3PlziCYmJHeY6vlEB2BpUBLIKf07n+u6GDSu5UaIBMva7iJIaMbC/eWe2nECzOHgVLQlPCqKriPEuruPnq/+L80aRWw13NWlk7YLN9Z6oVT6t04JAe1Tr7jMQc9Bj0XKq/qiJSZp7nVK8cpufVRG6I=; 24:8c6TJNElHyrlFE2lWx0EY/XQ6aoXe6ePTRapZ7qhY9aXckRIriFQqulbssIIjSu7uVIINj8RG+TC0aSQDrkASdTM0LUAIjSvqxemAXgb/Mo=; 7:pMDCfaVtp8pQAlOTbBNTb45MKMjixBa/2X6Z3SkdN4X6sq8tfbwy6HyoAgiQU5eREFVYTs+BULZrP2XJ1ATJdLdY1wIMASrF37hQxBbVTeU30CbAVZhcgJkUkXpNxcC69J9soQNm8RfQbSGmIzbc6uKsJLKUtchR4yVKYS+DZ+eD6fsSE5qyVftByp2aYxiKBMuMcMwmnTgZJtq5dmo8yaRyihiPl40CYZ3RpYV8jc8TxMVfORHzz6WvpCN2dekR/fT5YwvyduOzLpXGEcw0EOmVKR1XtBCMRBRNrcVsfX2KYiSeIp9gKukxfMvA7Ju8 x-forefront-antispam-report: EFV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(98900016); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2NAM03HT004; H:BN6PR11MB1811.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: aa2f5180-9f3c-45f6-d856-08d466b42398 x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(201702061074)(5061506573)(5061507331)(1603103135)(201702181095)(1603101448)(1601125254)(1701031045); SRVR:BY2NAM03HT004; x-ms-exchange-slblob-mailprops: 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 x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(432015161)(444000031); SRVR:BY2NAM03HT004; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY2NAM03HT004; x-forefront-prvs: 0241D5F98C spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: hotmail.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 09 Mar 2017 06:18:44.1636 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2NAM03HT004 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Mar 2017 06:18:46.0143 (UTC) FILETIME=[023438F0:01D2989D] Subject: Re: SIMD Instruction supported in UEFI? X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 06:18:47 -0000 Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >>From UEFI shell From: Ken Taylor Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2017 4:51 AM To: Amit kumar; edk2-devel@lists.01.org Subject: RE: [edk2] SIMD Instruction supported in UEFI? =A0 =20 Hi Amit, Maybe in UEFI the code in question crosses a cache line boundary when execu= ted in UEFI, with the loop or part of the instruction itself on one side of= the boundary and the rest on the other?=A0 At what point are you trying to= execute this code, is it still from the UEFI shell or have you moved it i= nto a driver that runs earlier? You might try changing the linker flags to force 4k code alignment on your = test binary. Regards, -Ken. -----Original Message----- From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of Amit= kumar Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 7:10 AM To: edk2-devel@lists.01.org Subject: [edk2] SIMD Instruction supported in UEFI? Hi ; I have written a UEFI app in ASM which runs XOR on a block of data using SI= MD instructions ("PXOR") in UEFI environment. It takes around 2 Seconds to run this code, but when i use normal C XOR ope= rator ("^") it takes 1 Seconds. Is there something wrong ? I mean SIMD instructions must be giving me bette= r performance(my expectation); But when i do same experiment in Windows environment SIMD code ( _mm_xor_si= 128 ) gives me 9 times better performance than normal XOR instruction.=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 =A0Have i missed something?. Regards Amit Kumar _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list edk2-devel@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel =