lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jul]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH] x86-64: software IRQ masking and handling
From
Date
Le dimanche 11 juillet 2010 à 18:18 -0700, Linus Torvalds a écrit :
> On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> >
> > I have seen some hits with cli-sti. I was considering swapping all
> > preempt_disable() with local_irq_save() in ftrace, but hackbench showed
> > a 30% performance degradation when I did that.
>
> Yeah, but in that case you almost certainly keep the per-cpu cacheline
> hot in the D$ L1 cache, and the stack tracer is presumably also not
> taking any extra I$ L1 misses. So you're not seeing any of the
> downsides. The upside of plain cli/sti is that they're small, and have
> no D$ footprint.
>
> And it's possible that the interrupt flag - at least if/when
> positioned right - wouldn't have any additional D$ footprint under
> normal load either. IOW, if there is an existing per-cpu cacheline
> that is effectively always already dirty and in the cache,
> But that's something that really needs macro-benchmarks - exactly
> because microbenchmarks don't show those effects since they are always
> basically hot-cache.
>

Some kernel dev incorrectly assume they own cpu caches...

This discussion reminds me I noticed a performance problem with
placement of cpu_online_bits and cpu_online_mask on separate sections
(and thus separate cache lines) and a network load.

static DECLARE_BITMAP(cpu_online_bits, CONFIG_NR_CPUS) __read_mostly;
const struct cpumask *const cpu_online_mask = to_cpumask(cpu_online_bits);

Two changes are possible :

1) Get rid of the cpu_online_mask (its a const pointer to a known
target). I cant see a reason for its need it actually...

2) Dont use a the last const qualifier but __read_mostly to move
cpu_online_mask on same section.

Rusty, could you comment on one or other way before I submit a patch ?

(Of course, possible/present/active have same problem)


--
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: 2010-07-12 07:21    [W:0.050 / U:1.084 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site