[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1422386304.4604.4.camel@stgolabs.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 11:18:24 -0800
From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Jason Low <jason.low2@...com>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] locking/rwsem: Set lock ownership ASAP
On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 18:10 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> This is the thing I suggested
> lkml.kernel.org/r/20150108103708.GE29390@...ns.programming.kicks-ass.net
> there right?
Yeah.
> Do you have numbers for how much this gained?
This is more of a correctness patch, nothing really tangible for
performance -- although I did note a 5% tp increase as that particular
workload, as pounds on the osq so we have to wait for the node->next
pointer. Otherwise, the window between when we set the lock is taken and
owner is set is very small.
Thanks,
Davidlohr
--
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