From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751163AbVHYQyW (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2005 12:54:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751054AbVHYQyW (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2005 12:54:22 -0400 Received: from ns1.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:58016 "EHLO mx1.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751163AbVHYQyV (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2005 12:54:21 -0400 From: Andi Kleen To: Zachary Amsden Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64 Avoid some atomic operations during address space destruction Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 18:54:09 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Pratap Subrahmanyam References: <42F5FB9A.5000708@vmware.com> In-Reply-To: <42F5FB9A.5000708@vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200508251854.10060.ak@suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sunday 07 August 2005 14:16, Zachary Amsden wrote: > This turned out to be a huge win on 32-bit i386 in PAE mode, but it is > likely not as significant on x86_64; I don't know because I haven't > actually measured the cost. I don't have 64-bit hardware that I have > the luxury of rebooting right now, so this patch is untested, but if > someone wants to try this out, it might actually show a measurable win > on fork/exit. I lost my cycle count measurement diffs, but I don't > think they would apply cleanly to x86_64 anyways. This patch at least > looks good, and compiles cleanly on 2.6.13-rc5-mm1, thus passing some > level of testing. FYI I have queued it, but cannot apply it because the necessary generic code support is still not in mainline. Do you have any other optimizations pending for x86-64? There is still the iopl optimization that you did that is on my TODO list to add. Anything else. -Andi