![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Nick Piggin wrote: > > > Nick Piggin wrote: > >> >> >> >> The benchmark dies at 160 rooms unfortunately. Probably something in >> the JVM. >> >> I'll do a larger number of runs around the 130-150 mark. >> > > OK, this is an average of 5 runs at 145, 150, 155 rooms with my scheduler > patches, with and without my rwsem patch. Its all over the place, but > I think > rwsem does give a small but significant improvement. > > http://www.kerneltrap.org/~npiggin/rwsem2.png What do you think? Is there any other sorts of benchmarks I should try? The improvement I think is significant, although volanomark is quite erratic and doesn't show it well. I don't see any problem with moving the wakeups out of the rwsem's spinlock. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:59 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||