From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Frédéric Weisbecker" <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
peterz@infradead.org, "Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Andi Kleen" <ak@linux.intel.com>,
"Tony Luck" <tony.luck@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mutex: prevent optimistic spinning from spinning longer than neccessary (Repost)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 15:19:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100820131920.GC3321@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1877.10.21.68.23.1282256686.squirrel@linux.intel.com>
* Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > Ingo wrote:
> >
> > These are some rather impressive speedups!
> >
> > Have you tried to see what performance effects this change has on
> smaller
> > boxes? Just to see what flip side (if any) this change has.
> >
>
> I've done similar experiments with 2.6.35 kernel on smaller boxes. One is
> on a dual-socket Westmere box (12 cores total, with HT). Another
> experiment is on an old dual-socket Core 2 box (4 cores total, no HT)
>
> On the 12-core Westmere box, I see a 250% increase for Ingo's mutex-test
> program with my mutex patch but no significant difference in aim7's
> fserver workload.
>
> On the 4-core Core 2 box, I see the difference with the patch for both
> mutex-test and aim7 fserver are negligible.
Great!
> So far, it seems like the patch has not caused regression on smaller
> systems. We'll put it through more workloads to check.
Thanks! The performance results you've posted so far IMO more than justifies
its inclusion.
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-20 13:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-18 22:00 [PATCH 1/1] mutex: prevent optimistic spinning from spinning longer than neccessary (Repost) Tim Chen
2010-08-19 11:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-08-19 22:24 ` Tim Chen
2010-08-20 13:19 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2010-08-20 16:54 ` Tim Chen
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=20100820131920.GC3321@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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