Re: [benchmark] 1% performance overhead of paravirt_ops on nativekernels

[Linus Torvalds]

On Sun, 7 Jun 2009, Rusty Russell wrote:
>
> "possible"?  You mean "acceptable".  Gray, not black and white.

I don't think we can possibly claim to support UP configurations if we 
don't patch. 

> 1) Where's the line?

"As good as we can make it". There is no line. There's "your code sucks so 
badly that it needs to get fixed, or we'll rip it out or disable it".

> 2) Where are we?  Does patching claw back 5% of the loss?  50%?  90%?

On some things, especially on P4, the lock overhead was tens of percent. 
Just a single locked instruction takes closer to two hundred instructions.

Of course, on those P4's, just kernel entry/exit is pretty high too (even 
with sysenter/exit), so I doubt you'll ever see something be 90% just 
because of that, unless it causes extra IO or other non-CPU issues.

		Linus
--
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/