From: Hanna Linder <hannal@us.ibm.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@zip.com.au>,
"Martin J. Bligh" <Martin.Bligh@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Hanna Linder <hannal@us.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net,
viro@math.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] lockmeter results comparing 2.4.17, 2.5.3, and 2.5.5
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 11:57:57 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <19890000.1014839877@w-hlinder.des> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3C7D374B.4621F9BA@zip.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <10460000.1014833979@w-hlinder.des>, <10460000.1014833979@w-hlinder.des> <67850000.1014834875@flay> <3C7D374B.4621F9BA@zip.com.au>
--On Wednesday, February 27, 2002 11:45:15 -0800 Andrew Morton <akpm@zip.com.au> wrote:
> The big one is lru_list_lock, of course. I'll be releasing code in
> the next couple of days which should take that off the map. Testing
> would be appreciated.
Ill be glad to run this again with your patch. Also, John Hawkes
has an even bigger system and keeps hitting lru_list_lock too.
>
> I have a concern about the lockmeter results. Lockmeter appears
> to be measuring lock frequency and hold times and contention. But
> is it measuring the cost of the cacheline transfers?
This has come up a few times on lse-tech. Lockmeter doesnt
measure cacheline hits/misses/bouncing. However, someone said
kernprof could be used to access performance registers on the Pentium
chip to get this info. I don't know anyone who has tried that though.
I am working on a patch to decrease cacheline bouncing and it
would be great to see some specific results. Is anyone working on a tool
that could measure cache hits/misses/bouncing?
Hanna
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-02-27 19:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-02-27 18:19 lockmeter results comparing 2.4.17, 2.5.3, and 2.5.5 Hanna Linder
2002-02-27 18:34 ` [Lse-tech] " Martin J. Bligh
2002-02-27 19:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-02-27 19:45 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-27 19:57 ` Hanna Linder [this message]
2002-02-28 8:31 ` Ravikiran G Thirumalai
2002-02-27 20:01 ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-02-27 20:15 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-27 21:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-02-27 21:48 ` Alexander Viro
2002-02-27 23:14 ` Hanna Linder
2002-02-27 23:32 ` Hanna Linder
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-02-27 21:30 Niels Christiansen
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=19890000.1014839877@w-hlinder.des \
--to=hannal@us.ibm.com \
--cc=Martin.Bligh@us.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@zip.com.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=viro@math.psu.edu \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox