Re: REGRESSION: Performance regressions from switchinganon_vma->lock to mutex

[Tim Chen]

On Wed, 2011-06-15 at 23:37 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-06-15 at 14:12 -0700, Tim Chen wrote:
> > Thanks to Andi for providing the info.  We've used this workaround in
> > our testing so it will not mask true kernel scaling bottlenecks.
> 
> 
> http://programming.kicks-ass.net/sekrit/39-2.txt.bz2
> http://programming.kicks-ass.net/sekrit/tip-2.txt.bz2
> 
> tip+sirq+linus is still slightly faster than .39 here, although removing
> that sysconf() wreckage closed the gap considerably (needing to know the
> number of cpus to optimize locking sounds like a trainwreck all of its
> own, needing it _that_ often instead of just once at startup is even
> worse).
> 

Peter,

Fengguang's readahead fixes for tmpfs removed another bottleneck before
anon_vma->lock become dominant. https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/4/26/143)
We've found this issue when we were testing exim earlier.
It was merged in 3.0-rc2 but not in plain 2.6.39.  So with this patch on
2.6.39 we should get better comparison with 3.0-rc2.

Thanks.

Tim  


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/