lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Mar]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: SMP performance degradation with sysbench
    Eric Dumazet wrote:
    > On Tuesday 13 March 2007 12:12, Nick Piggin wrote:
    >
    >>I guess googlemalloc (tcmalloc?) isn't suitable for a general purpose
    >>glibc allocator. But I wonder if there are other improvements that glibc
    >>can do here?
    >
    >
    > I cooked a patch some time ago to speedup threaded apps and got no feedback.

    Well that doesn't help in this case. I tested and the mmap_sem contention
    is not an issue.

    > http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/8/9/26
    >
    > Maybe we have to wait for 32 core cpu before thinking of cache line
    > bouncings...

    The idea is a good one, and I was half way through implementing similar
    myself at one point (some java apps hit this badly).

    It is just horribly sad that futexes are supposed to implement a
    _scalable_ thread synchronisation mechanism, whilst fundamentally
    relying on an mm-wide lock to operate.

    I don't like your interface, but then again, the futex interface isn't
    exactly pretty anyway.

    You should resubmit the patch, and get the glibc guys to use it.

    --
    SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
    Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com

    -
    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: 2007-03-13 12:59    [W:0.020 / U:0.164 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site