more accurate dcache timing?

src/ARM.h

@@ -223,6 +223,11 @@ public:
     void CP15Write(u32 id, u32 val);
     u32 CP15Read(u32 id);
 
+    void CalcDCacheCycles(u32 addr);
+
+    u32 DCacheCurIndex = 0;
+    u32 DCacheHistory[32] = {0};
+    u64 DCacheHistorySum = 0;
     u32 CP15Control;
 
     u32 RNGSeed;

src/CP15.cpp

@@ -27,12 +27,19 @@
 // this was measured to be close to hardware average
 // a value of 1 would represent a perfect cache, but that causes
 // games to run too fast, causing a number of issues
-const int kDataCacheTiming = 3;//2;
+const int kDataCacheTiming = 1;//2;
+const int kDataCacheTimingSlow = 17;
 const int kCodeCacheTiming = 3;//5;
 
+u64 sumDataCacheCycles = 0;
+u64 dataCacheInstrsCount = 0;
 
 void ARMv5::CP15Reset()
 {
+    printf("avg. %f\n", (float)sumDataCacheCycles/(float)dataCacheInstrsCount);
+    sumDataCacheCycles = 0;
+    dataCacheInstrsCount = 0;
+
     CP15Control = 0x2078; // dunno
 
     RNGSeed = 44203;
@@ -277,8 +284,8 @@ void ARMv5::UpdateRegionTimings(u32 addrstart, u32 addrend)
 
         if (pu & 0x10)
         {
-            MemTimings[i][1] = kDataCacheTiming;
+            MemTimings[i][1] = 0xFF;
-            MemTimings[i][2] = kDataCacheTiming;
+            MemTimings[i][2] = 0xFF;
             MemTimings[i][3] = 1;
         }
         else
@@ -291,6 +298,28 @@ void ARMv5::UpdateRegionTimings(u32 addrstart, u32 addrend)
 }
 
 
+void ARMv5::CalcDCacheCycles(u32 addr)
+{
+    u64 prevAvg = DCacheHistorySum / 32;
+
+    DCacheHistorySum -= DCacheHistory[DCacheCurIndex];
+    DCacheHistory[DCacheCurIndex] = addr & ~0x1F;
+    DCacheHistorySum += DCacheHistory[DCacheCurIndex];
+
+    u64 curAvg = DCacheHistorySum / 32;
+
+    u64 diff = abs((s64)curAvg - (s64)prevAvg);
+    if (diff > 3)
+        DataCycles = kDataCacheTimingSlow;
+    else
+        DataCycles = kDataCacheTiming;
+    dataCacheInstrsCount++;
+    sumDataCacheCycles += DataCycles;
+
+    DCacheCurIndex++;
+    DCacheCurIndex &= 0x1F;
+}
+
 u32 ARMv5::RandomLineIndex()
 {
     // lame RNG, but good enough for this purpose
@@ -740,6 +769,11 @@ void ARMv5::DataRead8(u32 addr, u32* val)
 
     *val = NDS::ARM9Read8(addr);
     DataCycles = MemTimings[addr >> 12][1];
+
+    if (DataCycles == 0xFF)
+    {
+        CalcDCacheCycles(addr);
+    }
 }
 
 void ARMv5::DataRead16(u32 addr, u32* val)
@@ -761,6 +795,11 @@ void ARMv5::DataRead16(u32 addr, u32* val)
 
     *val = NDS::ARM9Read16(addr);
     DataCycles = MemTimings[addr >> 12][1];
+    
+    if (DataCycles == 0xFF)
+    {
+        CalcDCacheCycles(addr);
+    }
 }
 
 void ARMv5::DataRead32(u32 addr, u32* val)
@@ -782,6 +821,11 @@ void ARMv5::DataRead32(u32 addr, u32* val)
 
     *val = NDS::ARM9Read32(addr);
     DataCycles = MemTimings[addr >> 12][2];
+    
+    if (DataCycles == 0xFF)
+    {
+        CalcDCacheCycles(addr);
+    }
 }
 
 void ARMv5::DataRead32S(u32 addr, u32* val)
@@ -822,6 +866,11 @@ void ARMv5::DataWrite8(u32 addr, u8 val)
 
     NDS::ARM9Write8(addr, val);
     DataCycles = MemTimings[addr >> 12][1];
+
+    if (DataCycles == 0xFF)
+    {
+        CalcDCacheCycles(addr);
+    }
 }
 
 void ARMv5::DataWrite16(u32 addr, u16 val)
@@ -843,6 +892,11 @@ void ARMv5::DataWrite16(u32 addr, u16 val)
 
     NDS::ARM9Write16(addr, val);
     DataCycles = MemTimings[addr >> 12][1];
+
+    if (DataCycles == 0xFF)
+    {
+        CalcDCacheCycles(addr);
+    }
 }
 
 void ARMv5::DataWrite32(u32 addr, u32 val)
@@ -864,6 +918,11 @@ void ARMv5::DataWrite32(u32 addr, u32 val)
 
     NDS::ARM9Write32(addr, val);
     DataCycles = MemTimings[addr >> 12][2];
+
+    if (DataCycles == 0xFF)
+    {
+        CalcDCacheCycles(addr);
+    }
 }
 
 void ARMv5::DataWrite32S(u32 addr, u32 val)