public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <h.peter.anvin@intel.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [RFC/HACK] x86: Fast return to kernel
Date: Sun, 4 May 2014 20:40:16 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140504184016.GA16438@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrX8wCxRj9=F7_pM_SKdSxSYttMyLZKAWTy9HurAmtfC2w@mail.gmail.com>


* Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:

> > That said, regular *device* interrupts do often return to kernel 
> > mode (the idle loop in particular), so if you have any way to 
> > measure that, that might be interesting, and might show some of 
> > the same advantages.
> 
> I can try something awful involving measuring latency of 
> hardware-timed packets on a SolarFlare card, but I'll have 
> calibration issues.  I suppose I could see if 'ping' gets faster.  
> In general, this will speed up interrupts that wake userspace from 
> idle by about 100ns on my box, since it's presumably the same size 
> and the speedup per loop in my silly benchmark.

To simulate high rate device IRQ you can generate very high frequency 
lapic IRQs by using hrtimers, that's generating a ton of per CPU lapic 
IRQs.

Thanks,

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2014-05-04 18:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-05-02 19:04 [RFC/HACK] x86: Fast return to kernel Andy Lutomirski
2014-05-02 19:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-02 19:50   ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-05-04 18:40     ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2014-05-04 19:59       ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-05-04 21:31         ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-04 22:01           ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-05-02 19:51   ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-02 20:07     ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-05-02 20:30     ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-05-02 21:01       ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-02 21:04         ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-05-02 21:07           ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-02 21:37             ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-05-02 21:42               ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-05-02 21:44                 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-05-02 21:28         ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-05-04 23:46     ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-05-04 23:49       ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-05-02 20:19   ` Steven Rostedt

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=20140504184016.GA16438@gmail.com \
    --to=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=h.peter.anvin@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@amacapital.net \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=x86@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