Re: SMP performance degradation with sysbench

From: Nick Piggin
Date: Tue Mar 13 2007 - 07:57:11 EST


Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Tuesday 13 March 2007 12:12, Nick Piggin wrote:

I guess googlemalloc (tcmalloc?) isn't suitable for a general purpose
glibc allocator. But I wonder if there are other improvements that glibc
can do here?


I cooked a patch some time ago to speedup threaded apps and got no feedback.

Well that doesn't help in this case. I tested and the mmap_sem contention
is not an issue.

http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/8/9/26

Maybe we have to wait for 32 core cpu before thinking of cache line bouncings...

The idea is a good one, and I was half way through implementing similar
myself at one point (some java apps hit this badly).

It is just horribly sad that futexes are supposed to implement a
_scalable_ thread synchronisation mechanism, whilst fundamentally
relying on an mm-wide lock to operate.

I don't like your interface, but then again, the futex interface isn't
exactly pretty anyway.

You should resubmit the patch, and get the glibc guys to use it.

--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com -
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/