[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1277889854.1868.104.camel@laptop>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 11:24:14 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com>
Cc: jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com, mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de,
Ky Srinivasan <KSrinivasan@...ell.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hpa@...or.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4, v2] x86: enlightenment for ticket spin locks -
improve yield behavior on Xen
On Wed, 2010-06-30 at 09:49 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 30.06.10 at 10:11, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 15:35 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>
> >> The (only) additional overhead this introduces for native execution is
> >> the writing of the owning CPU in the lock acquire paths.
> >
> > Uhm, and growing the size of spinlock_t to 6 (or 8 bytes when aligned)
> > bytes when NR_CPUS>256.
>
> Indeed, I should have mentioned that. Will do so in an eventual
> next version.
It would be good to also get a measure of data structure bloat caused by
this, not sure .data section size is representable there, but its
something easy to provide.
Something like: pahole -s build/vmlinux | awk '{t+=$2} END {print t}'
from before and after might also be interesting.
--
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