virtualization.lists.linux-foundation.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: jeremy@goop.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	paul.gortmaker@windriver.com, hpa@zytor.com, ak@linux.intel.com,
	gleb@redhat.com, x86@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
	xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	riel@redhat.com, konrad.wilk@oracle.com, oleg@redhat.com,
	davej@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, fernando_b1@lab.ntt.co.jp,
	chegu_vinod@hp.com, waiman.long@hp.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pbonzini@redhat.com,
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2] Implement Batched (group) ticket lock
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2014 16:41:06 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53B2974A.6010809@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140701095521.GO6758@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>

>>
>> For baremetal we continue to have 'fully fair ticketlock' with this patch
>> series.
>>
>
> But but but, we're looking at removing ticket locks. So why do we want
> to invest in them now?
>

I have nothing against qspinlock. I am happy to test it/add any bit to 
it if I could.

With this patch we get excellent performance for guest with the
unmodified kernel without affecting host.

My test on guest with batch_size =16,32 showed even better performance
               bs=16      bs=32
  ebizzy_0.5x   0.14       0.90
  ebizzy_1.0x   3.57       7.52
  ebizzy_1.5x  58.97      67.65
  ebizzy_2.0x 121.55     136.45

      reply	other threads:[~2014-07-01 11:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-06-28  9:17 [RFC PATCH v2] Implement Batched (group) ticket lock Raghavendra K T
2014-07-01  8:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-01  9:44   ` Raghavendra K T
2014-07-01  9:55     ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-01 11:11       ` Raghavendra K T [this message]

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=53B2974A.6010809@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=chegu_vinod@hp.com \
    --cc=davej@redhat.com \
    --cc=fernando_b1@lab.ntt.co.jp \
    --cc=gleb@redhat.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jeremy@goop.org \
    --cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=paul.gortmaker@windriver.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=waiman.long@hp.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).