Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] locking/qrwlock: Don't contend with readers when setting _QW_WAITING

[Waiman Long]

On 06/10/2015 03:35 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Waiman Long<Waiman.Long@xxxxxx>  wrote:
>
> > The current cmpxchg() loop in setting the _QW_WAITING flag for writers
> > in queue_write_lock_slowpath() will contend with incoming readers
> > causing possibly extra cmpxchg() operations that are wasteful. This
> > patch changes the code to do a byte cmpxchg() to eliminate contention
> > with new readers.
> >
> > A multithreaded microbenchmark running 5M read_lock/write_lock loop
> > on a 8-socket 80-core Westmere-EX machine running 4.0 based kernel
> > with the qspinlock patch have the following execution times (in ms)
> > with and without the patch:
> >
> > With R:W ratio = 5:1
> >
> > 	Threads	   w/o patch	with patch	% change
> > 	-------	   ---------	----------	--------
> > 	   2	     990 	    895		  -9.6%
> > 	   3	    2136 	   1912		 -10.5%
> > 	   4	    3166	   2830		 -10.6%
> > 	   5	    3953	   3629		  -8.2%
> > 	   6	    4628	   4405		  -4.8%
> > 	   7	    5344	   5197		  -2.8%
> > 	   8	    6065	   6004		  -1.0%
> > 	   9	    6826	   6811		  -0.2%
> > 	  10	    7599	   7599		   0.0%
> > 	  15	    9757	   9766		  +0.1%
> > 	  20	   13767	  13817		  +0.4%
> >
> > With small number of contending threads, this patch can improve
> > locking performance by up to 10%. With more contending threads,
> > however, the gain diminishes.
> Mind posting the microbenchmark?
>
> Thanks,
>
> 	Ingo

I have attached the tool that I used for testing.

Cheers,
Longman

Attachment: locktest.tar.gz
Description: GNU Zip compressed data