Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 9 Aug 2004 17:31:19 -0400 (EDT) | From | Zwane Mwaikambo <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH][2.6] Completely out of line spinlocks / x86_64 |
| |
On Mon, 9 Aug 2004, Andi Kleen wrote:
> I think the 50k number is wrong. I took a look at it and the big > difference is only seen when you enable interrupts during spinning, which > we didn't do before. If you compare it to the old implementation the > difference is much less.
Yes agreed the increase wouldn't be of as high a magnitude if compared to the original code, but it's still a decent saving.
> I don't really like the config option. Either it's a good idea > then it should be done by default without option or it should not be done at all. > > Did you do any lock intensive benchmarks that could show a slowdown?
I went for a file IO type benchmark, the differences looked like statistical noise, possibly the best bet would be to check for cache hits/misses.
> You should make this file assembly only.
Ok you're the second person to mention that, i don't have a problem with switching to assembly only and dumping the exports in x8664_ksyms.c
Thanks, Zwane
- 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/
| |