Benchmarking Genode TrustZone

[Tiago Brito]

Hi, so after comparing the binaries I realized that my NW application is
using hard float instruction, unlike it's SW counter part.

I changed my NW application toolchain for one which support soft float in
order to check if my measurements are consistent. And in some way the
execution time gap between both for-loops decreased significantly, but
there's still a 100 ms gap between both execution times.

Before the NW was measuring 155 ms and the SW was measuring 610 ms. Now the
NW is measuring 500 ms whilst the SW is measuring the same 610 ms as before.

My theory is that Genode's scheduling might be delaying the SW execution. I
say this because I added a print in the resume function of the thread
scheduler and it prints several times when the SW for-loop is executing.

What I want to ask is, is my theory plausible? Would the SW scheduler delay
the execution by 100 ms? It seems a bit too much time...
What can I do to shorten this time gap between both executions?

Thanks in advance, Tiago

2016-06-27 12:16 GMT+01:00 Tiago Brito <tb.genode at ...9...>:

> Hi again, I'm using the linaro's arm-linux-gnueabihf 5.3 toolchain to
> compile the application running on top of the NW linux, but I want to try
> and compile it using the same compiler version used for genode since the
> use of different compilers is probably interfering with my benchmark
> measurements (it's the only variant).
>
> I tried using the GCC present in genode's toolchain but I'm having several
> No such file or directory errors with stdio.h and string.h includes. My
> application also uses sockets, so the necessary include files are used and
> may cause similar errors in the compilation process.
>
> Do you have any suggestion on how to solve this and get the same basic
> for-loop to show similar performance results in both the Normal and Secure
> World execution contexts?
>
> Thanks, Tiago
>
> 2016-06-23 17:20 GMT+01:00 Christian Helmuth <
> christian.helmuth at ...1...>:
>
>> Hello Tiago,
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 04:32:18PM +0100, Tiago Brito wrote:
>> > I did not check if the binary code is similar, but I did measure just
>> the
>> > for-loop in both worlds and the times are those I described previously.
>>
>> You really should compare the binary code as example that's slower in
>> SW uses floating arithmetics unless I'm mistaken. If the code is
>> similar and the execution time differs much, there may be an issue
>> with FPU handling in SW.
>>
>> Greets
>> --
>> Christian Helmuth
>> Genode Labs
>>
>> http://www.genode-labs.com/ · http://genode.org/
>> https://twitter.com/GenodeLabs · /ˈdʒiː.nəʊd/
>>
>> Genode Labs GmbH · Amtsgericht Dresden · HRB 28424 · Sitz Dresden
>> Geschäftsführer: Dr.-Ing. Norman Feske, Christian Helmuth
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Attend Shape: An AT&T Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT&T Park in San
>> Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
>> present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
>> everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
>> http://sdm.link/attshape
>> _______________________________________________
>> genode-main mailing list
>> genode-main at lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/genode-main
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.genode.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20160628/0db055f2/attachment.html>