From: Nick Bowler <nbowler@elliptictech.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org,
mingo@elte.hu, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
josh@joshtriplett.org, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, dhowells@redhat.com,
edumazet@google.com, darren@dvhart.com, fweisbec@gmail.com,
sbw@mit.edu, patches@linaro.org
Subject: Re: Does anyone use CONFIG_TINY_PREEMPT_RCU?
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 17:40:40 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121113224040.GA14594@elliptictech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121113222521.GI2489@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On 2012-11-13 14:25 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 04:47:20PM -0500, Nick Bowler wrote:
> > On 2012-11-13 13:19 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 12:56:54PM -0500, Nick Bowler wrote:
> > > > On 2012-11-13 09:08 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > > Suppose that TREE_PREEMPT_RCU was available for !SMP && PREEMPT builds.
> > > > > Would that work for you?
> > > >
> > > > To be honest I don't really know what the difference is, other than what
> > > > the help text says, which is:
> > > >
> > > > [TINY_PREEMPT_RCU] greatly reduces the memory footprint of RCU.
> > > >
> > > > "Greatly reduced memory footprint" sounds pretty useful...
> > >
> > > OK, so from your viewpoint, the only possible benefit is smaller
> > > memory?
> >
> > Well, I have no idea. If I was given the choice between TREE_PREEMPT_RCU
> > and TINY_PREEMPT_RCU, absent any information not in the description of
> > these options, I would choose TINY. The description suggests that the
> > memory savings come at the expense of SMP support, which sounds like a
> > great tradeoff to make for a UP system.
> >
> > > How much memory does your device have, if I may ask?
> >
> > It's a (pretty old!) desktop. I recently had to upgrade it to two
> > gigabytes due to unbearable thrashing with only one...
>
> If you have two gigabytes (or even one gigabyte), you won't notice the
> few kilobytes of difference between TINY_PREEMPT_RCU and TREE_PREEMPT_RCU.
Well then TINY_PREEMPT_RCU doesn't sound all that useful for me!
Perhaps the help text could be improved... such as changing the words
"greatly reduced" to "marginally reduced" as a first step?
Is there no significant cache impact due to the larger implementation?
I don't really have the time or expertise to do measurements in this
regard, but if TREE_PREEMPT_RCU was actually a selectable option I could
at least choose it to see if anything explodes horribly...
Cheers,
--
Nick Bowler, Elliptic Technologies (http://www.elliptictech.com/)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-11-13 22:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-11-13 0:49 Does anyone use CONFIG_TINY_PREEMPT_RCU? Paul E. McKenney
2012-11-13 1:12 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-11-13 1:17 ` Josh Triplett
2012-11-13 1:34 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-11-13 1:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-11-13 1:32 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-11-13 14:46 ` Nick Bowler
2012-11-13 17:08 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-11-13 17:56 ` Nick Bowler
2012-11-13 21:19 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-11-13 21:47 ` Nick Bowler
2012-11-13 22:25 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-11-13 22:40 ` Nick Bowler [this message]
2012-11-14 0:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
[not found] ` <CAGChsmOBB1yFNP5xSa06v+CYn0A=AjcZTyAzL8npWRdNYYLBZA@mail.gmail.com>
2012-11-13 23:04 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-11-13 20:22 ` Tim Sander
2012-11-13 21:20 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-11-13 23:32 ` Tim Sander
2012-11-14 0:06 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-11-14 0:36 ` Josh Triplett
2012-11-14 1:07 ` 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=20121113224040.GA14594@elliptictech.com \
--to=nbowler@elliptictech.com \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=darren@dvhart.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=patches@linaro.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sbw@mit.edu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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.