Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/4] Programmatic nestable expedited grace periods
From: Paul E. McKenney
Date: Fri Feb 20 2015 - 13:27:59 EST
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 09:32:39AM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> >>>>Does it really make a machine boot much faster? Why are people using
> >>>>synchronous gp primitives if they care about speed? Should we not fix
> >>>>that instead?
> >>>The report I heard was that it provided 10-15% faster boot times.
> >>That's not insignificant; got more details? I think we should really
> >>look at why people are using the sync primitives.
> >I must defer to the people who took the exact measurements.
> >But yes, once I have that info, I should add it to the commit log.
> so the two most obvious cases are
> Registering sysrq keys ... even when the old key code had no handler
> (have a patch pending for this)
> registering idle handlers
> (this is more tricky, it's very obvious abuse but the fix is less clear)
> there's a few others as well that I'm chasing down...
> .. but the flip side, prior to running ring 3 code, why NOT do fast expedites?
It would be good to have before-and-after measurements of actual
boot time. Are these numbers available?
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/