Re: [RFC PATCH v2] memory-barriers: remove smp_mb__after_unlock_lock()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, 2015-07-15 at 07:18 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 01:06:18PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-07-14 at 08:31 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > Michael, at some point you were experimenting a bit with that and tried
> > > to get some perf numbers of the impact that would have, did that
> > > solidify ? Otherwise, I'll have a look when I'm back next week.
> > 
> > I was mainly experimenting with replacing the lwsync in lock with an isync.
> > 
> > But I think you're talking about making it a full sync in lock.
> > 
> > That was about +7% on p8, +25% on p7 and +88% on p6.
> 
> Just for completeness, what were you running as benchmark?  ;-)

Heh sorry :)

That was my lockcomparison benchmark, based on Anton's original. It just does
100,000,000 lock/unlocks for each type in userspace:

  https://github.com/mpe/lockcomparison/blob/master/lock_comparison.c

cheers


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Newbies]     [x86 Platform Driver]     [Netdev]     [Linux Wireless]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Yosemite Discussion]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux