Re: [PATCH 0/7] slub: Fastpath optimization (especially for RT) V1
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer
Date: Thu Dec 11 2014 - 11:51:26 EST
On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 09:03:24 -0600 (CST)
Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Dec 2014, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
>
> > It looks like an impressive saving 116 -> 60 cycles. I just don't see
> > the same kind of improvements with my similar tests[1][2].
>
> This is particularly for a CONFIG_PREEMPT kernel. There will be no effect
> on !CONFIG_PREEMPT I hope.
>
> > I do see the improvement, but it is not as high as I would have expected.
>
> Do you have CONFIG_PREEMPT set?
Yes.
$ grep CONFIG_PREEMPT .config
CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU=y
CONFIG_PREEMPT_NOTIFIERS=y
# CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE is not set
# CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY is not set
CONFIG_PREEMPT=y
CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT=y
Full config here:
http://people.netfilter.org/hawk/kconfig/config01-slub-fastpath01
I was expecting to see at least (specifically) 4.291 ns improvement, as
this is the measured[1] cost of preempt_{disable,enable] on my system.
[1] https://github.com/netoptimizer/prototype-kernel/blob/master/kernel/lib/time_bench_sample.c
--
Best regards,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer
MSc.CS, Sr. Network Kernel Developer at Red Hat
Author of http://www.iptv-analyzer.org
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
--
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/