 |
AM263x MCU+ SDK
09.02.00
|
|
|
AM263x MCU+ SDK
09.02.00
|
|
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| CPU + OS | r5fss0-0 freertos |
| Toolchain | ti-arm-clang |
| Boards | am263x-cc, am263x-lp |
| Example folder | examples/benchmarks/ocmc_benchmarking |
| Application Output | Description |
|---|---|
| Mem Cpy size => 100 | Size of the memcpy in bytes executed by each task |
| Exec Time in usec => 2567 | Amount of time in microseconds |
| Iter => 1 | Number of times the test was run |
| Task calls => 500 | Number of randomly ordered calls to the 16 tasks |
| Inst Cache miss => 11421 | Total instruction cache misses |
| Inst Cache acc => 650207 | Total instruction cache accesses |
| num switches => 1469 | Number of total context switches |
| num instr exec => 1029260 | Total number of executed instructions |
| ICM/sec => 4449162 | Instruction cache misses per second |
| INST/sec => 400958317 | Instructions executed per second |
Please read more on smart placement at Smart Placement, before moving further ahead.
In this example,annotations.S is an assembly file that contains annotations.
Assembly annotations is being used for easier implementation.
annotations.S has a macro named ENABLE_SMART_PLACEMENT_ANNOTATION which can be used to enable and disable annotations which will effectively enable and disable smart placement.
Here it will be shown how code performance (or CPI) is improved with smart placement.
To build this application, compiler ti-cgt-armllvm >= 3.2.0 LTS or later is required. Application can be compiled using make command.
This particular application is used to show the effect of smart placement. To do this, we first remove ENABLE_SMART_PLACEMENT_ANNOTATION macro (which is in annotations.S file.) and compile it. To know how annotations.S has been generated then please refer to Software Instrument Smart Placement
Flash this application using uart_uniflash. For this please go through UART Uniflash
After running the application, console logs prints out in the above table format with different configuration like Mem Cpy Size i.e. for different values of Mem Cpy Size, exec time and ICM/sec (among with others) is printed. For example,
OCMC benchmarking:: Board_init success Countdown... 1/5 2/5 3/5 4/5 5/5 Filling up the buffers Inst Cache Miss: 2 Inst Cache Access: 22 Data Cache Miss: 39 master_task master_task -- start sending Mem Cpy Size => 0 Start Time in Usec => 244351 Exec Time in Usec => 11867 Iter => 1 Task Calls => 500 Inst Cache Miss => 87023 Inst Cache Acc => 856803 Num Instr Exec => 1893125 ICM/sec => 9 ICM/sec => 9 INST/sec => 197 INST/sec => 197 Mem Cpy Size => 100 Start Time in Usec => 269072 Exec Time in Usec => 12428 Iter => 1 Task Calls => 500 Inst Cache Miss => 85720 Inst Cache Acc => 995992 Num Instr Exec => 2087348 ICM/sec => 8 ICM/sec => 8 INST/sec => 207 INST/sec => 207 Mem Cpy Size => 200 Start Time in Usec => 298477 Exec Time in Usec => 13130 Iter => 1 Task Calls => 500 Inst Cache Miss => 86529 Inst Cache Acc => 1141634 Num Instr Exec => 2287056 ICM/sec => 8 ICM/sec => 8 INST/sec => 215 INST/sec => 215 Mem Cpy Size => 400 Start Time in Usec => 325456 Exec Time in Usec => 14606 Iter => 1 Task Calls => 500 Inst Cache Miss => 88361 Inst Cache Acc => 1446200 Num Instr Exec => 2688209 ICM/sec => 7 ICM/sec => 7 INST/sec => 227 INST/sec => 227 Mem Cpy Size => 1000 Start Time in Usec => 354810 Exec Time in Usec => 18367 Iter => 1 Task Calls => 500 Inst Cache Miss => 84032 Inst Cache Acc => 2342630 Num Instr Exec => 3879466 ICM/sec => 5 ICM/sec => 5 INST/sec => 260 INST/sec => 260 Mem Cpy Size => 1500 Start Time in Usec => 388418 Exec Time in Usec => 23678 Iter => 1 Task Calls => 500 Inst Cache Miss => 86357 Inst Cache Acc => 3106798 Num Instr Exec => 4892362 ICM/sec => 4 ICM/sec => 4 INST/sec => 255 INST/sec => 255 Mem Cpy Size => 2000 Start Time in Usec => 426769 Exec Time in Usec => 28432 Iter => 1 Task Calls => 500 Inst Cache Miss => 86051 Inst Cache Acc => 3855309 Num Instr Exec => 5887390 ICM/sec => 3 ICM/sec => 3 INST/sec => 255 INST/sec => 255 Mem Cpy Size => 2250 Start Time in Usec => 471196 Exec Time in Usec => 31236 Iter => 1 Task Calls => 500 Inst Cache Miss => 88306 Inst Cache Acc => 4239124 Num Instr Exec => 6397039 ICM/sec => 3 ICM/sec => 3 INST/sec => 252 INST/sec => 252
So from the above, mem Cpy Size is changing, ICM is almost same but Exec Time in Usec is increasing which is thereby changing ICM/sec. Here to find the base line, Exec Time in Usec should be selected for the case where ICM/sec is 3 (or ~3Millions Instruction Cache Miss/Sec) and from the above data, it can be determined that when mem Cpy Size is 2000, ICM/sec was 3 and for this, it took 28432 us to execute the application. Therefore, 28432 us is our baseline number.
Now after this, ENABLE_SMART_PLACEMENT_ANNOTATION macro is defined again and example is compiled back.
running that would give similar logs and execution time against the Mem Cpy Size of 2000 is to be noted and has been measured out to be 25758 us. Following table shows the same:
| Mem Cpy Size | INST/sec | Exec Time in Usec without Smart Placement | Exec Time in Usec with Smart Placement |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0000 | 7333192 | 11867 | 9424 |
| 0100 | 7002172 | 12428 | 10057 |
| 0200 | 6627799 | 13130 | 10653 |
| 0400 | 5958031 | 14606 | 12105 |
| 1000 | 4509122 | 18367 | 15924 |
| 1500 | 3647140 | 23678 | 21222 |
| 2000 | 3026765 | 28432 | 25758 |
| 2250 | 2827058 | 31236 | 28583 |
Therefore, with smart placement code was executed in 25758us and without smart placement same code executed in 28432us which corresponds to performance gain of 10% without changing of any code.
1.8.20