From: Waiman Long <waiman.long@hp.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Locking changes for v4.2
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 13:27:02 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <558D8B66.3060108@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1435309910.4110.74.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
On 06/26/2015 05:11 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-06-22 at 09:30 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> Linus,
>>
>> Please pull the latest locking-core-for-linus git tree from:
>>
>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git locking-core-for-linus
>>
>> # HEAD: 68722101ec3a0e179408a13708dd020e04f54aab locking/lockdep: Remove hard coded array size dependency
>>
>> The main changes are:
>>
>> - 'qspinlock' support, enabled on x86: queued spinlocks - these are now the
>> spinlock variant used by x86 as they outperform ticket spinlocks in every
>> category. (Waiman Long)
> Very interesting.
>
> While rebasing http://www.kernelhub.org/?msg=737214&p=2
>
> I found that indeed qspinlock improved the scalability issue by a big
> factor.
>
> linux-4.1
>
> lpaa23:~# pipebench -n 16
> threads:16 sleep:30 pinned:1
> total operations: 6977349, ops/sec 232578
> 6977349
>
> lpaa23:~# pipebench -n 16
> threads:16 sleep:30 pinned:1
> total operations: 7326280, ops/sec 244209
> 7326280
>
>
> Current Linus tree :
>
> lpaa23:~# pipebench -n 16
> threads:16 sleep:30 pinned:1
> total operations: 15640802, ops/sec 521360
> 15640802
>
> lpaa23:~# pipebench -n 16
> threads:16 sleep:30 pinned:1
> total operations: 15045022, ops/sec 501500
> 15045022
>
>
> Adding fd_install() patch then :
>
> lpaa23:~# pipebench -n 16
> threads:16 sleep:30 pinned:1
> total operations: 21471043, ops/sec 715701
> 21471043
>
> lpaa23:~# pipebench -n 16
> threads:16 sleep:30 pinned:1
> total operations: 21068501, ops/sec 702283
> 21068501
I am glad that the qspinlock patch helps. May I know what kind of
machine (cpu type, # of sockets, etc) that you are running the test on?
Usually the more sockets the machine has, the bigger the improvement you
will see.
Cheers,
Longman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-26 17:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-22 7:30 [GIT PULL] Locking changes for v4.2 Ingo Molnar
2015-06-26 9:11 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-06-26 17:27 ` Waiman Long [this message]
2015-06-26 19:57 ` Eric Dumazet
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=558D8B66.3060108@hp.com \
--to=waiman.long@hp.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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