[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130903140808.GA14734@amd.pavel.ucw.cz>
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2013 16:08:08 +0200
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>,
Waiman Long <waiman.long@...com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...e.cz>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"Chandramouleeswaran, Aswin" <aswin@...com>,
"Norton, Scott J" <scott.norton@...com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/4] spinlock: A new lockref structure for lockless
update of refcount
Hi!
> It is entirely possible that it is just a "cycles:pp" oddity - because
> the "lock xadd" is serializing, it can't retire until everything
> around it has been sorted out, and maybe it just shows up in profiles
> more than is really "fair" to the instruction itself, because it ends
> up being that stable point for potentially hundreds of instructions
> around it.
Hmm, turn "lock xadd" into plain add, and see if it improves loops per
second? Preferably on scratch filesystem, because you may corrupt it...
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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