Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1192589 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-07-27 01:50 +0200 |
| Last post | 2015-07-27 01:50 +0200 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH v3 2/7] locking/pvqspinlock: Add pending bit support Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2015-07-27 01:50 +0200
| From | Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-27 01:50 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 2/7] locking/pvqspinlock: Add pending bit support |
| Message-ID | <pQDQ5-1a3-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Wed, 2015-07-22 at 16:12 -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > Using a locking microbenchmark on the same system, the locking > rates in (kops/s) were: > > Threads Rate w/o patch Rate with patch > ------- -------------- --------------- > 2 (same socket) 6,515,265 7,077,476 > 2 (diff sockets) 2,967,145 4,353,851 At this level stddev would be nice to have, as these sort of things have a lot of variation. Out of general interest, are these microbenchmarks available? Would you care to add something like that to perf-bench? I assume they would probably be x86 specific. Thanks, Davidlohr -- 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/
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web