Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Tue, 10 Jan 2006 16:31:21 -0600 | | From | Joel Schopp <> | | Subject | Re: PowerPC fastpaths for mutex subsystem | |
> interesting. Could you try two things? Firstly, could you add some
> minimal delays to the lock/unlock path, of at least 1 usec? E.g.
> "synchro-test.ko load=1 interval=1". [but you could try longer delays
> too, 10 usecs is still realistic.]
Graphs attached. The summary for those who don't like to look at attachments is
that the mutex fastpath (threads 1) that I sent the optimized patch for is
comparable within the margin of error to semaphores. The mutex common path
(threads > 1) gets embarrassed by semaphores. So mutexes common paths are not
yet ready as far as ppc64 is concerned.
>
> secondly, could you try the VFS creat+unlink test via the test-mutex.c
> code below, with something like:
>
> ./test-mutex V 16 10
Queued into my todo list.
>
> thirdly, could you run 'vmstat 1' during the tests, and post those lines
> too? Here i'm curious about two things: the average runqueue length
> (whether we have overscheduling), and CPU utilization and idle time left
> (how efficiently cycles are preserved in contention). [btw., does ppc
> have an idle=poll equivalent mode of idling?]
Also queued in my todo list.
>
> also, there seems to be some fluctuation in the numbers - could you try
> to run a few more to see how stable the numbers are?
For the graphs the line is the average of 5 runs, and the 5 runs are scatter
plotted as well.
[image][image][image] |  |