On 01/02/2017 12:16 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Em Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 11:13:39AM -0500, Waiman Long escreveu: >> This microbenchmark simulates how the use of different futex types >> can affect the actual performanace of userspace mutex locks. The >> usage is: >> >> perf bench futex mutex <options> > Showing the tool output is preferred, trim it if needed or state why > that is not possible. I will do so when I update the patchset. > >> Three sets of simple mutex lock and unlock functions are implemented >> using the wait-wake, PI and TP futexes respectively. This >> microbenchmark then runs the locking rate measurement tests using >> either one of those mutexes or all of them consecutively. >> >> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> tools/perf/bench/Build | 1 + >> tools/perf/bench/bench.h | 1 + >> tools/perf/bench/futex-locks.c | 844 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> tools/perf/bench/futex.h | 23 ++ >> tools/perf/builtin-bench.c | 10 + >> tools/perf/check-headers.sh | 4 + > You forgot to document it in tools/perf/Documentation/perf-bench.txt Yes, I forgot about that. I will update the document in the next v5 patchset. > Also I would suggest you submit this first without supportint TP > futexes, i.e. supporting just what is in the kernel already, this way I > could cherry-pick this, which would be useful already for benchmarking > the existing types of futexes. > > Then, after the new futex type is accepted into the kernel, in a > separate patch you would add support for it in 'perf bench futex mutex'. I can separate out the TP portion of the changes and put them later in the patchset. Thanks for the comments. Cheers, Longman -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
