Re: [PATCH 0/4] i386 - pte update optimizations

[Andi Kleen]

Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On 13/4/07 03:24, "Zachary Amsden" <zach@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> >> You do know that P6 and higher don't do locked bus references as long
> >> as the value is in the cache, right?
> > 
> > Yes.  Even then, last time I clocked instructions, xchg was still slower
> > than read / write, although I could be misremembering.  And it's not
> > totally clear that they will always be in cached state, however, and for
> > SMP, we still want to drop the implicit lock in cases where the
> > processor might not know they are cached exclusive, but we know there
> > are no other racing users.  And there are plenty of old processors out
> > there to still make it worthwhile.
> 
> LOCKed instruction suck really badly on the netburst microarchitecture (like
> factor of 10x, or not far off). I think it's probably because of their side
> effect of serialising memory accesses, causing horrible pipeline stalls.

Unfortunately they tend to be HyperThreaded usually (except for early ones 
and Celerons) and need the LOCK anyways.

-Andi
-
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/