From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87C80BB81 for ; Thu, 9 Mar 2006 04:12:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from conn.mc.mpls.visi.com (conn.mc.mpls.visi.com [208.42.156.2]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id k293CNlj003488 for ; Thu, 9 Mar 2006 04:12:24 +0100 Received: from [192.168.42.2] (bhurt.dsl.visi.com [208.42.141.66]) by conn.mc.mpls.visi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5997A81D9; Wed, 8 Mar 2006 21:12:23 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 21:13:30 -0600 (CST) From: Brian Hurt X-X-Sender: bhurt@localhost.localdomain To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lodewijk_V=F6ge?= Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] STM support in OCaml In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <440DB255.1030701@asfandyar.cjb.net> <1141751708.20944.355.camel@budgie.wigram> <440DD982.8080800@asfandyar.cjb.net> <1141779125.20944.405.camel@budgie.wigram> <20060308193633.GA5460@coruscant.stwing.upenn.edu> <1141855594.23909.63.camel@budgie.wigram> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="8323328-619200570-1141874010=:9569" X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 440F9D17.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 rdtsc:01 rdtsc:01 rax:01 wrote:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 inline:01 readable:01 unreadable:02 assembler:02 gnu:02 seems:03 brian:04 brian:04 X-Attachments: cset="X-UNKNOWN" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323328-619200570-1141874010=:9569 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Lodewijk V=F6ge wrote: > On 8-mrt-2006, at 23:11, Brian Hurt wrote: > >> Love to. Wanna buy me the box? :-} Seriously- my code is attached, if= =20 >> someone wants to run it on other boxes and post the results, feel free.= =20 >> It's GNU-C/x86 specific, as I'm using GNU C's inline assembler and the= =20 >> rdtsc instruction to get accurate cycle counts. > > I don't know if rdtsc is accurate on 64bit, but this is what running it o= n a=20 > dual opteron 250 running 64bit linux gives: On 64-bit, I think rdtsc only sets the RAX register. At least that's what= =20 I'm assuming is going on- 144 million clocks for a rdtsc seems a bit=20 extreme. Brian --8323328-619200570-1141874010=:9569--