Re: [PATCH v7 1/4] spinlock: A new lockref structure for lockless update of refcount

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

 



On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> A Samsung series-5 ultrabook.
>
> $ grep "model name" /proc/cpuinfo | uniq
> model name      : Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2467M CPU @ 1.60GHz

Hmm. Do you have debugging options enabled? Because that CPU should
have the same core count as mine (two+HT), a slightly smaller cache
(3M vs 4M) and runs at a noticeably lower frequency (1.6GHz vs 3.5).
It probably also has slower memory etc, but that should still make it
maybe half speed of mine. Not 1/20th.

As mentioned, I get numbers in the 65M range. Yours are under 2.7M.
Even with some thermal throttling, I would expect better than that.

My pixel (1.8GHz i5-3427U) should be a *bit* faster that yours. And I
get 54M iterations on that.

I saw you mentioned CONFIG_CMPXCHG_LOCKREF=y in your .config, so you
don't have spinlock debugging enabled, but maybe you have some other
expensive debug option enabled. Like DEBUG_PAGEALLOC etc.

If you get "perf" compiled, mind doing a

    perf record -f -e cycles:pp ./a.out
    perf report

on it and look what that says?

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




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux