[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080327104359.GC26725@elte.hu>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 11:43:59 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, npiggin@...e.de, paulus@...ba.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, tony.luck@...el.com,
Alan.Brunelle@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Generic smp_call_function(), improvements, and
smp_call_function_single()
* Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com> wrote:
> I very much wanted the kthread approach to work, since it's easier to
> work with. It's not for lack of will or trying... I'll be happy to
> supply you otherwise identical patches for this, the only difference
> being kthread of IPI completions if you want to play with this.
i'd love to be able to run/pull something simple that enables me to
replicate the measurements you did on a generic PC [without having to
hit any real IO hardware which would put any context switching effects
down into the noise category].
Obviously since the kthread approach embedds IPI sending it can never be
as fast as a pure IPI approach - but it should still be reasonably fast.
3 usecs versus 2 usecs in a microbenchmark sounds about right to me, but
it would be better to make it a better-sounding 2.5 usecs versus 2 usecs
or so :-)
Ingo
--
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