[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFw7j1qLeNxhjfDqc1_MVHkr0m=VPGE+Lx5AmCBwxf8xyQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 08:01:39 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Emmanuel Benisty <benisty.e@...il.com>,
"Vinod, Chegu" <chegu_vinod@...com>,
"Low, Jason" <jason.low2@...com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, aquini@...hat.com,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Larry Woodman <lwoodman@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] ipc: reduce ipc lock contention
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:13 PM, Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com> wrote:
>
> Digging into the _raw_spin_lock call:
>
> 17.86% oracle [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _raw_spin_lock
> |
> --- _raw_spin_lock
> |
> |--49.55%-- sys_semtimedop
> | |
> | |--77.41%-- system_call
> | | semtimedop
> | | skgpwwait
> | | ksliwat
> | | kslwaitctx
Hmm. It looks like you cut that off a bit too early. This shows that
half the cases came from sys_semtimedop. Where did the other half come
from?
Linus
--
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