Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.programming.threads > #2690

Re: W have to be smart

Show all headers | View raw

On 11/18/2014 7:46 PM, Ramine wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
>
> The PhD paper says about the benchmarks that gives 6x scalability that:
>
>
> "The graph shows the average throughput in terms of
> number of critical and non-critical section pairs executed per second.
> The critical section accesses two distinct cache blocks (increments
> 4 integer counters on each block), and the non-critical section
> is an idle spin loop of up to 4 microseconds."
>
>
> So i think from the benchmark that the idle loop doen't count as
> a serial part cause it is not a critical section and it doesn't affect
> by much the Amdahl's law, so the critical section that  accesses
> the two distinct cache blocks and increments 4 integer counters on each
> block will use ILP (instruction level parallelism) of the processor
> to lower the amount of CPU clocks that it takes in the critical section
> that means it will lower the time of serial part of the Amdahl's law,
> and the parallel part is when you enter the the local locks and this
> will take a number of CPU clocks, and i think this is what is giving the
> 6x scaling with the Amdahl's law calculation, and what i want to explain
> is that it is not the mimization of the inter-socket coherence traffic


I mean "minimization", not mimization.

> that is giving the 6x scalability, but it's the Amdahl's law that is
> giving 6x scalability.
>
>
>
> Thank you,
> Amine Moulay Ramdane.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Back to comp.programming.threads | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

W have to be smart Ramine <ramine@1.1> - 2014-11-18 18:41 -0800
  Re: W have to be smart Ramine <ramine@1.1> - 2014-11-18 19:10 -0800
  Re: W have to be smart Ramine <ramine@1.1> - 2014-11-18 19:46 -0800
    Re: W have to be smart Ramine <ramine@1.1> - 2014-11-18 20:02 -0800

csiph-web