Re: [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was: Strange performance behavior of 2.4.0-test9)

Andrew Morton
2000-10-30T15:00:58Z

kumon@flab.fujitsu.co.jp wrote:
>
> Andrew Morton writes:
> >
> > I agree with me. Could you please test the scalability
> > of this?
>
> Here is the result, measured on 8-way profusion.

Thank you!

> Andrew posted two paches, so called P1 and P2.

Was `P2' the shorter one? It looks like it.

> Req/s
> test10-pre5: 2255 bad performance
> ----
> test9+P2: 5243
> test10-pre5+P1: 5187
> test10-pre5+P2: 5258
>
> P2 may be a little bit better.

I'd be interested in seeing the -DSINGLE_LISTEN_UNSERIALIZED_ACCEPT
figures.

Dean, it looks like the same problem will occur with flock()-based
serialisation. Does Apache/Linux ever use that option?