From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
Cc: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RCU] adds a prefetch() in rcu_do_batch()
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 09:15:33 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061130171533.GB1869@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200611300955.52293.dada1@cosmosbay.com>
On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 09:55:52AM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thursday 30 November 2006 02:25, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 04:02:29PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > On some workloads, (for example when lot of close() syscalls are done),
> > > RCU qlen can be quite large, and RCU heads are no longer in cpu cache
> > > when rcu_do_batch() is called.
> > >
> > > This patches adds a prefetch() in rcu_do_batch() to give CPU a hint to
> > > bring back cache lines containing 'struct rcu_head's.
> > >
> > > Most list manipulations macros include prefetch(), but not open coded
> > > ones (at least with current C compilers :) )
> > >
> > > I got a nice speedup on a trivial benchmark (3.48 us per iteration
> > > instead of 3.95 us on a 1.6 GHz Pentium-M)
> > > while (1) { pipe(p); close(fd[0]); close(fd[1]);}
> >
> > Interesting! How much of the speedup was due to the prefetch() and how
> > much to removing the extra store to rdp->donelist?
>
> I only benchmarked the prefetch() case.
>
> Then, when cooking the patch I found I could do the rdp->donelist affectation
> after the loop. I am not sure it's worth to do another benchmark for this
> trivial optimization (Please dont tell me its not a valid one :) )
It would be a good idea to check it out. Modern CPUs can be a bit
on the tricky side. I have seen cases where removing instructions
slowed things down. And it can't be -that- hard to run the other
two cases!
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-11-30 17:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-11-21 20:33 [PATCH] snd-hda-intel: fix insufficient memory wbrana
2006-11-22 6:46 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-22 15:02 ` [RCU] adds a prefetch() in rcu_do_batch() Eric Dumazet
2006-11-22 17:48 ` [PATCH] dont insert pipe dentries into dentry_hashtable Eric Dumazet
2006-11-22 21:36 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-22 21:40 ` Al Viro
2006-11-23 4:12 ` David Miller
2006-11-30 1:25 ` [RCU] adds a prefetch() in rcu_do_batch() Paul E. McKenney
2006-11-30 8:55 ` Eric Dumazet
2006-11-30 17:15 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2006-11-22 17:19 ` [PATCH] snd-hda-intel: fix insufficient memory wbrana
2006-11-22 20:04 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-23 20:17 ` wbrana
2006-11-23 21:10 ` 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=20061130171533.GB1869@us.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.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