Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1474257
| From | Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched/cputime: Improve scalability of times()/clock_gettime() on 32 bit cpus |
| Date | 2016-09-01 12:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <scxpU-vd-21@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <scwDv-8ch-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <scwDv-8ch-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <scwNc-8lV-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <scxgd-rt-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 12:07:34PM +0200, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 11:49:06AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > You're now making rather hot paths slower to benefit a rather slow path, > > that too is backwards. > > Ok, you have right, I made update_curr() slower (a bit I think, since > this new seqcount primitive should be in the same cache line as other > things). seqcount adds 2 smp_wmb(), which on ARM, are not free (it is possible to do with just 1 FWIW). > But do we don't care about inconsistency of accessing of 64 bit variable > on 32 bit processors (see patch 3) ? I know this is unlikely scenario > to get inconsistency, but I assume it's still possible, or not? Its actually quite possible. We've observed it a fair few times. 64bit variables are 2 32bit stores/loads and getting interleaved data is quite possible. > If not, I can get rid of read_sum_exec_runtime() and just read > sum_exec_runtime without task_rq_lock() protection on > thread_group_cputime() . That would make the benchmark happy. I think this benchmark is misguided. Just accept that O(nr_threads) is expensive, same with process wide itimer, just don't use them when you care about performance.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH 1/3] sched/cputime: Improve scalability of times()/clock_gettime() on 32 bit cpus Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com> - 2016-09-01 11:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched/cputime: Improve scalability of times()/clock_gettime() on 32 bit cpus Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-09-01 11:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched/cputime: Improve scalability of times()/clock_gettime() on 32 bit cpus Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com> - 2016-09-01 12:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched/cputime: Improve scalability of times()/clock_gettime() on 32 bit cpus Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-09-01 12:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched/cputime: Improve scalability of times()/clock_gettime() on 32 bit cpus Giovanni Gherdovich <ggherdovich@suse.cz> - 2016-09-04 20:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched/cputime: Improve scalability of times()/clock_gettime() on 32 bit cpus kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com> - 2016-09-01 12:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched/cputime: Improve scalability of times()/clock_gettime() on 32 bit cpus kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com> - 2016-09-01 13:20 +0200
csiph-web