lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Sep]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/3] sched/cputime: Improve scalability of times()/clock_gettime() on 32 bit cpus
On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 11:27:42AM +0200, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
> My previous commit:
>
> a1eb1411b4e4 ("sched/cputime: Improve scalability by not accounting thread group tasks pending runtime")
>
> helped to achieve good performance of SYS_times() and
> SYS_clock_gettimes(CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID) on 64 bit architectures.
> However taking task_rq_lock() when reading t->se.sum_exec_runtime on
> 32 bit architectures still make those syscalls slow.
>
> The reason why we take the lock is to make 64bit sum_exec_runtime
> variable consistent. While a inconsistency scenario is very very unlike,
> I assume it still may happen at least on some 32 bit architectures.
>
> To protect the variable I introduced new seqcount lock. Performance
> improvements on machine with 32 cores (32-bit cpus) measured by
> benchmarks described in commit:

No,.. running 32bit kernels on a machine with 32 cores is insane, full
stop.

You're now making rather hot paths slower to benefit a rather slow path,
that too is backwards.

[ also, seqcount is not a lock ].

Really, people should not expect process wide numbers to be fast.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-09-17 09:58    [W:0.059 / U:0.468 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site