Jes Sorensen wrote:
"Ingo" == Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> writes:
Ingo> this is the latest version of the mutex subsystem
Ingo> patch-queue. It consists of the following patches:
[snip]
Ingo> the patches are against Linus' latest tree, and were tested on
Ingo> i386, x86_64 and ia64. [the tests were also done in
Ingo> DEBUG_MUTEX_FULL mode, to make sure the code works
Ingo> fine. MUTEX_FULL support is not included in this patchqueue].
Hi,
I have been working with Ingo on porting this to ehe ia64 and run a
bunch of benchmarks using the DEBUG_MUTEX_FULL settings to see how it
behaves on various sized systems (8, 24 and 60 CPUs). In general I am
seeing speedups of roughly a factor 4 on XFS and 2.4 on TMPFS.
Below you will find the results. It's basically the same kernel
version with and without the mutex patch running in DEBUG_MUTEX_FULL
mode without debugging enabled. No other config options were changed.
I won't rule out any pilot errors, but at least it gives an idea about
the change in performance for a specific workload on different sized
boxes.
It would be nice to first do a run with a fair implementation of
mutexes.
The improvements are definitely large enough that you cannot dismiss
the unfair implementation... I wonder if you can record a maximum
cost per op? That would be more interesting than either average or
standard deviation.
Thanks,
Nick
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
