All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>,
	"Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com>,
	Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] smp_call_function: use rwlocks on queues rather than rcu
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 09:34:57 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080823073457.GV23334@one.firstfloor.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48AF0702.8040303@goop.org>

On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 11:35:46AM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Right now my impression is that it is not well understood why
> > the kmalloc makes the IPI that much slower. In theory a kmalloc
> > shouldn't be all that slow, it's essentially just a 
> > "disable interrupts; unlink object from cpu cache; enable interrupts"
> > with some window dressing. kfree() is similar.
> >
> > Does it bounce a cache line on freeing perhaps?
> 
> I think it's just an assumption that it would be slower.  Has anyone
> measured it?

It's likely slower than no kmalloc because
there will be more instructions executed, the question is just how much.

> 
> (Note: The measurements I posted do not cover this path, because it was
> on a two cpu system, and it was always using the call-single path.)

Ah so it was already 25% slower even without kmalloc? I thought
that was with already. That doesn't sound good. Any idea where that slowdown 
comes from?

-Andi

  reply	other threads:[~2008-08-23  7:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-08-22  0:29 [PATCH 2/2] smp_call_function: use rwlocks on queues rather than rcu Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-08-22  1:53 ` Nick Piggin
2008-08-22  6:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-22  7:06   ` Pekka Enberg
2008-08-22  7:12     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-22  9:12       ` Nick Piggin
2008-08-22 14:01     ` Christoph Lameter
2008-08-22 15:11       ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-08-22 17:14         ` Christoph Lameter
2008-08-22 18:29           ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-08-22 18:33             ` Andi Kleen
2008-08-22 18:35               ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-08-23  7:34                 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2008-08-24  4:55                   ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-08-24  9:01                     ` Andi Kleen
2008-08-22 22:40               ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-08-22 18:36             ` Christoph Lameter
2008-08-22 19:52               ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-08-22 20:03                 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-08-22 20:53                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-08-25 10:31                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-25 15:12                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-08-25 15:22                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-25 15:46                           ` Christoph Lameter
2008-08-25 15:51                             ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-26 13:43                               ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-08-26 14:07                                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-27 15:16                                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-08-25 20:04                             ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-08-26  5:13                             ` Nick Piggin
2008-08-26 13:40                               ` [PATCH 2/2] smp_call_function: use rwlocks on queues rather?than rcu Paul E. McKenney
2008-08-25 15:44                         ` [PATCH 2/2] smp_call_function: use rwlocks on queues rather than rcu Christoph Lameter
2008-08-25 20:05                           ` Paul E. McKenney

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20080823073457.GV23334@one.firstfloor.org \
    --to=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
    --cc=jeremy@goop.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
    --cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
    --cc=venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.