[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1288383614.2680.10.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 22:20:14 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
Cc: Alban Crequy <alban.crequy@...labora.co.uk>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Pauli Nieminen <pauli.nieminen@...labora.co.uk>,
Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@...gmbh.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] RFC: poll/select performance on datagram sockets
Le vendredi 29 octobre 2010 à 13:08 -0700, Davide Libenzi a écrit :
> Yeah, epoll does check for event hints coming with the callback wakeup,
> and avoid waking up epoll_wait() waiters, for non matching events.
> Most of the devices we care about, have been modified to report the event
> mask with the wakeup call.
Alban test program is _very_ pathological :
All the time is consumed in do_select() because of false sharing between
two tasks.
We can probably rearrange variables in do_select() to make this false
sharing less problematic. I am taking a look at this.
Events: 3K cycles
+ 26.14% uclient [kernel.kallsyms] [k] do_raw_spin_lock
+ 21.11% uclient [kernel.kallsyms] [k] do_select
+ 13.38% uclient [kernel.kallsyms] [k] pollwake
+ 9.22% uclient [kernel.kallsyms] [k] unix_dgram_poll
+ 5.24% uclient [kernel.kallsyms] [k] unix_peer_get
+ 3.04% uclient [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore
+ 3.03% uclient [kernel.kallsyms] [k] task_rq_lock
+ 2.85% uclient [kernel.kallsyms] [k] do_raw_spin_unlock
+ 1.84% uclient [kernel.kallsyms] [k] try_to_wake_up
+ 1.55% uclient [kernel.kallsyms] [k] fget_light
+ 1.34% uclient [kernel.kallsyms] [k] core_kernel_text
annotate :
5.66 : 410fb342: 85 ff test %edi,%edi
0.00 : 410fb344: 74 1f je 410fb365 <do_select+0x3d5>
0.13 : 410fb346: 85 b5 6c fd ff ff test %esi,-0x294(%ebp)
0.00 : 410fb34c: 74 17 je 410fb365 <do_select+0x3d5>
: res_out |= bit;
0.00 : 410fb34e: 09 b5 5c fd ff ff or %esi,-0x2a4(%ebp)
: retval++;
0.00 : 410fb354: 83 85 64 fd ff ff 01 addl $0x1,-0x29c(%ebp)
: wait = NULL;
0.00 : 410fb35b: c7 85 7c fd ff ff 00 movl $0x0,-0x284(%ebp)
0.00 : 410fb362: 00 00 00
: }
: if ((mask & POLLEX_SET) && (ex & bit)) {
43.27 : 410fb365: 85 d2 test %edx,%edx
0.00 : 410fb367: 0f 84 f3 fe ff ff je 410fb260 <do_select+0x2d0>
0.00 : 410fb36d: 85 b5 74 fd ff ff test %esi,-0x28c(%ebp)
0.00 : 410fb373: 0f 84 e7 fe ff ff je 410fb260 <do_select+0x2d0>
: res_ex |= bit;
0.00 : 410fb379: 09 b5 58 fd ff ff or %esi,-0x2a8(%ebp)
: if (all_bits == 0) {
: i += __NFDBITS;
: continue;
: }
--
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