Re: [test result] dirty logging without srcu update -- Re: [RFC][PATCH]srcu: Implement call_srcu()

From: Avi Kivity
Date: Thu Feb 02 2012 - 05:22:07 EST


On 02/02/2012 12:21 PM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
> (2012/02/02 19:10), Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>>>
>>> =========================================================
>>> # of dirty pages: kvm.git (ns), with this patch (ns)
>>> 1: 102,077 ns 10,105 ns
>>> 2: 47,197 ns 9,395 ns
>>> 4: 43,563 ns 9,938 ns
>>> 8: 41,239 ns 10,618 ns
>>> 16: 42,988 ns 12,299 ns
>>> 32: 45,503 ns 14,298 ns
>>> 64: 50,915 ns 19,895 ns
>>> 128: 61,087 ns 29,260 ns
>>> 256: 81,007 ns 49,023 ns
>>> 512: 132,776 ns 86,670 ns
>>> 1024: 939,299 ns 131,496 ns
>>> 2048: 992,209 ns 250,429 ns
>>> 4096: 891,809 ns 479,280 ns
>>> 8192: 1,027,280 ns 906,971 ns
>>> (until now pretty good)
>>>
>>> (ah, for every 32-bit atomic clear mask ...)
>>> 16384: 1,270,972 ns 6,661,741 ns // 1 1 1 ... 1
>>> 32768: 1,581,335 ns 9,673,985 ns // ...
>>> 65536: 2,161,604 ns 11,466,134 ns // ...
>>> 131072: 3,253,027 ns 13,412,954 ns // ...
>>> 262144: 5,663,002 ns 16,309,924 ns // 31 31 31 ... 31
>>> =========================================================
>>
>> On a 64-bit host, this will be twice as fast. Or if we use cmpxchg16b,
>> and there are no surprises, four times as fast. It will still be slower
>> than the original, but by a smaller margin.
>
> Yes.
>
> I used "unsigned int" just because I wanted to use the current
> atomic_clear_mask() as is.
>
> We need to implement atomic_clear_mask_long() or use ...

If we use cmpxchg8b/cmpxchg16b then this won't fit with the
atomic_*_long family.

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
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/