public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bill Huey (Hui) <billh@gnuppy.monkey.org>
To: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Bill Huey (Hui)" <billh@gnuppy.monkey.org>
Subject: Re: first NPT vs. NGPT vs. LinuxThreads benchmark results
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 19:04:51 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020923020451.GA3446@gnuppy.monkey.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3D8DB040.7060402@redhat.com>

On Sun, Sep 22, 2002 at 04:57:52AM -0700, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> The results of this test series are:
> 
> - - LinuxThreads indeed had several problems
> 
> - - NGPT indeed run much faster (twice the performance)
> 
> - - NPTL runs four times faster than NGPT in a benchmark which by all
>   means should favor an M-on-N implementation.

Which could mean that they, NGPT, have slower thread allocation algorithms
for many reason. Some M:N systems will red zone protect a page of the thread
stack adding overhead to creation and deletion (FreeBSD'c -current does
this), the memory allocation algorithms might not be able to take advantage
of short term stack recycling and other things. It's not clear that these
benchmarks are meaningful without outlining the conditions that surround it.

Not to take the show away from you folks, but it's definitely something
that I immediately though about once I saw the graphs.

> We will soon have more benchmarks showing the thread libraries in
> other real-world situations, such as IO-intensive workloads.

bill


  reply	other threads:[~2002-09-23  1:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-09-22 11:57 first NPT vs. NGPT vs. LinuxThreads benchmark results Ulrich Drepper
2002-09-23  2:04 ` Bill Huey [this message]
2002-09-23  2:25   ` Ulrich Drepper

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=20020923020451.GA3446@gnuppy.monkey.org \
    --to=billh@gnuppy.monkey.org \
    --cc=drepper@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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