[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5346B2C8.6000207@linutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 17:03:36 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
CC: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH RT] rwsem: The return of multi-reader PI rwsems
On 04/10/2014 04:44 PM, Clark Williams wrote:
> The means of each group of five test runs are:
>
> vanilla.log: 1210117 rt.log: 17210953 (14.2 x slower than
> vanilla) rt-fixes.log: 10062027 (8.3 x slower than vanilla)
> rt-multi.log: 3179582 (2.x x slower than vanilla)
>
>
> As expected, vanilla kicked RT's butt when hammering on the
> mmap_sem. But somewhat unexpectedly, your fixups helped quite a
> bit and the multi+fixups got RT back into being almost
> respectable.
>
> Obviously these are just preliminary results on one piece of h/w
> but it looks promising.
Is it easy to look at the latency when you have multiple readers and
and a high prio writer which has to boost all those readers away
instead just one?
Or is this something that should not happen for a high prio RT task
because it has all memory already allocated?
>
> Clark
Sebastian
--
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