lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Jan]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] locking/pvqspinlock: Relax cmpxchg's to improve performance on some archs
From
Date
On 01/05/2017 03:16 AM, Pan Xinhui wrote:
>
>
> 在 2017/1/4 17:41, Peter Zijlstra 写道:
>> On Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 05:07:54PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
>>> On 01/03/2017 11:18 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 03:26:01PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
>>>>> A number of cmpxchg calls in qspinlock_paravirt.h were replaced by
>>>>> more
>>>>> relaxed versions to improve performance on architectures that use
>>>>> LL/SC.
>>>> Claim without numbers ;-)
>>>
>>> Well it is hard to produce actual numbers here as I don't have the
>>> setup
>>> to gather data.
>>
>> Surely RHT has big PPC machines around? I know that getting to them is a
>> wee bit of a bother, but they should be available somewhere.
>>
> hi,
>
> I do some tests about cmpxchg and cmpxchg_acquire before on ppc.
>
> loops in 15s of each cmpxchg is below.
>
> cmpxchg_relaxed: 336663
> cmpxchg_release: 369054
> cmpxchg_acquire: 363364
> cmpxchg: 179435
>
> so cmpxchg is really expensive than others.
> but I also have doubt about the cmpxchg_relaxed, it should be the
> cheapest, but from the tests, release/acquire are faster than it.
>
> thanks
> xinhui
>
Thanks for doing the test. It looks like we should just focus on using
either cmpxchg_release or cmpxchg_acquire and forget about cmpxchg_relaxed.

Cheers,
Longman

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-01-05 18:06    [W:0.075 / U:2.660 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site