Nick Piggin wrote:
Nick Piggin wrote:
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
Is that every fork/exec or just under certain cicumstances?
A 5% regression on every fork/exec is not acceptable.
Well after patch2, G5 fork is 3% and exec is 1%, I'd say the P4
numbers will be improved as well with that patch. Then if we have
specific lock/unlock bitops, I hope it should reduce that further.
OK, with the races and missing barriers fixed from the previous patch,
plus the attached one added (+patch3), numbers are better again (I'm not
sure if I have the ppc barriers correct though).
These ops could also be put to use in bit spinlocks, buffer lock, and
probably a few other places too.
2.6.21 1.49-1.51 164.6-170.8 741.8-760.3
+patch 1.71-1.73 175.2-180.8 780.5-794.2
+patch2 1.61-1.63 169.8-175.0 748.6-757.0
+patch3 1.54-1.57 165.6-170.9 748.5-757.5
So fault performance goes to under 5%, fork is in the noise, exec is
still up 1%, but maybe that's noise or cache effects again.
OK, with my new lock/unlock_page, dd if=large (bigger than RAM) sparse
file of=/dev/null with an experimentally optimal block size (32K) goes
from 626MB/s to 683MB/s on 2 CPU G5 booted with maxcpus=1.
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
-
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]
