[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45F69173.3050202@yahoo.com.au>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 22:56:35 +1100
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
To: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
CC: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@...e.de>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Lorenzo Allegrucci <l_allegrucci@...oo.it>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Suparna Bhattacharya <suparna@...ibm.com>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: SMP performance degradation with sysbench
Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 March 2007 12:12, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>>I guess googlemalloc (tcmalloc?) isn't suitable for a general purpose
>>glibc allocator. But I wonder if there are other improvements that glibc
>>can do here?
>
>
> I cooked a patch some time ago to speedup threaded apps and got no feedback.
Well that doesn't help in this case. I tested and the mmap_sem contention
is not an issue.
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/8/9/26
>
> Maybe we have to wait for 32 core cpu before thinking of cache line
> bouncings...
The idea is a good one, and I was half way through implementing similar
myself at one point (some java apps hit this badly).
It is just horribly sad that futexes are supposed to implement a
_scalable_ thread synchronisation mechanism, whilst fundamentally
relying on an mm-wide lock to operate.
I don't like your interface, but then again, the futex interface isn't
exactly pretty anyway.
You should resubmit the patch, and get the glibc guys to use it.
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists