From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: Martin Peschke <mp3@de.ibm.com>
Cc: heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, clg@fr.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch] statistics infrastructure - update 9
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2006 19:00:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200607061900.39406.ak@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <44AD406A.7090709@de.ibm.com>
> Good question. Btw. - faster by what order of magnitude?
pushf + popf is on K8 at least ~18 cycles, on P4 it is much more
because they synchronize the pipeline there (hundreds of cycles)
cpu local add would be a few cycles at best and doesn't have
any impact on the pipeline
> local_irq_save/restore seems to be fine for kernel/profile.c
>
>
> Reason 1:
> cpu_local_* uses __get_cpu_var, which conflicts with struct statistic
> being embedded into struct xyz that is allocated whenever the client
> needs it.
>
> I could try to use local_t in conjunction with local_add etc.
> (as seen in include/linux/dmaengine.h in 2.6.17-mm6).
> Does this also yield a performance gain worth consideration?
Yes, but you would need preempt_disable() then. For non preemptible
kernels (far majority) that would be already a big win.
> So, removing local_irq_save/restore would require statistics to be
> switched on and their buffers being available all the time. That is,
> buffers holding counters etc. can't be allocated at run time - what
> if allocation fails? (Should I leave this issue to clients?).
Can't you use RCU for this?
> Reason 4:
> The alleged overhead of local_irq_save/restore (as compared
> to atomic operations)
local_* doesn't need to be atomic. IT isn't on x86 at least.
On some other architectures it can be, but i think it's just a SMOP
of fixing them.
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-07-06 17:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-07-03 16:24 [Patch] statistics infrastructure - update 9 Martin Peschke
2006-07-03 16:41 ` Cedric Le Goater
2006-07-04 0:17 ` Andi Kleen
2006-07-06 16:55 ` Martin Peschke
2006-07-06 17:00 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2006-07-10 14:41 ` Martin Peschke
2006-07-04 6:17 ` Heiko Carstens
2006-07-04 7:19 ` Andrew Morton
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=200607061900.39406.ak@suse.de \
--to=ak@suse.de \
--cc=clg@fr.ibm.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mp3@de.ibm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox