Re: [PATCH] Don't apply for write lock on tasklist_lock if parentdoesn't ptrace other processes
From: Oleg Nesterov
Date: Fri Jul 23 2010 - 13:37:41 EST
On 07/23, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 11:05 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > I am not surpized perf blaims tasklist, but I am really surpized this patch
> > adds 10% improvement...
> I changed aim7 workfile to focus on fork/exec and other a couple of sub-cases.
> And this behavior is clear on 8-socket machines.
Thanks...
> After applying my patch (although it's incorrect as there is a race with TRACEME),
> perf shows write_lock_irq in forget_original_parent consumes less than 40% cpu time on
> 8-socket machine.
Any chance you can test the patch I sent? It should have the same effect,
otherwise there is something interesting.
> Is it possible to optimize it to use finer locks instead of the global tasklist_lock?
Heh. We must optimize it. But it is not clear when ;)
Oleg.
--
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/