[lkml]   [2005]   [Sep]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: New lockless pagecache
Hi Nick,

I have collected performance numbers for the lock less page cache
patch on the AIM - IO test.
The performance numbers are collected for 1-100 tasks 1-50 tasks and
90-100 tasks both for with and without your patch. This was done on
2.6.13 kernel.
There's definite improvement when the tasks are small i.e ~50-70. But
when the tasks go beyond 80, we see a large performance dip.
I again profiled the 90-100 runs with spinlock's inlined, but couldn't
understand the reason behind the performance difference.

Please find attached the performance numbers as well as the oprofile logs.

Thanks & Regards,

On 9/2/05, Nick Piggin <> wrote:
> Nick Piggin wrote:
> > I think this is getting pretty stable. No guarantees of course,
> > but it would be great if anyone gave it a test.
> >
> Or review, I might add. While I understand such a review is
> still quite difficult, this code really is far less complex
> than the previous lockless pagecache patches.
> (Ignore 1/7 though, which is a rollup - a broken out patchset
> can be provided on request)
> Nick
> --
> SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
> Send instant messages to your online friends
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to
> More majordomo info at
> Please read the FAQ at

A computer scientist is someone who, when told to "Go to Hell," sees
the "go to," rather than the destination, as harmful.

Alok Kataria
[unhandled content-type:application/octet-stream]
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-09-15 21:54    [W:0.110 / U:4.800 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site