From: Yury Norov <ynorov@caviumnetworks.com>
To: Adam Wallis <awallis@codeaurora.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Jan Glauber <jglauber@cavium.com>,
jason.low2@hp.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] arm64: queued spinlocks and rw-locks
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 13:33:09 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170413103309.GA1875@yury-N73SV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a4f067df-4c22-5c90-d70a-809903c60296@codeaurora.org>
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 01:04:55PM -0400, Adam Wallis wrote:
> On 4/10/2017 5:35 PM, Yury Norov wrote:
> > The patch of Jan Glauber enables queued spinlocks on arm64. I rebased it on
> > latest kernel sources, and added a couple of fixes to headers to apply it
> > smoothly.
> >
> > Though, locktourture test shows significant performance degradation in the
> > acquisition of rw-lock for read on qemu:
> >
> > Before After
> > spin_lock-torture: 38957034 37076367 -4.83
> > rw_lock-torture W: 5369471 18971957 253.33
> > rw_lock-torture R: 6413179 3668160 -42.80
> >
>
> On our 48 core QDF2400 part, I am seeing huge improvements with these patches on
> the torture tests. The improvements go up even further when I apply Jason Low's
> MCS Spinlock patch: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/4/20/725
It sounds great. So performance issue is looking like my local
problem, most probably because I ran tests on Qemu VM.
I don't see any problems with this series, other than performance,
and if it looks fine now, I think it's good enough for upstream.
Yury.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: ynorov@caviumnetworks.com (Yury Norov)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/3] arm64: queued spinlocks and rw-locks
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 13:33:09 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170413103309.GA1875@yury-N73SV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a4f067df-4c22-5c90-d70a-809903c60296@codeaurora.org>
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 01:04:55PM -0400, Adam Wallis wrote:
> On 4/10/2017 5:35 PM, Yury Norov wrote:
> > The patch of Jan Glauber enables queued spinlocks on arm64. I rebased it on
> > latest kernel sources, and added a couple of fixes to headers to apply it
> > smoothly.
> >
> > Though, locktourture test shows significant performance degradation in the
> > acquisition of rw-lock for read on qemu:
> >
> > Before After
> > spin_lock-torture: 38957034 37076367 -4.83
> > rw_lock-torture W: 5369471 18971957 253.33
> > rw_lock-torture R: 6413179 3668160 -42.80
> >
>
> On our 48 core QDF2400 part, I am seeing huge improvements with these patches on
> the torture tests. The improvements go up even further when I apply Jason Low's
> MCS Spinlock patch: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/4/20/725
It sounds great. So performance issue is looking like my local
problem, most probably because I ran tests on Qemu VM.
I don't see any problems with this series, other than performance,
and if it looks fine now, I think it's good enough for upstream.
Yury.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-13 10:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-10 21:35 [RFC PATCH 0/3] arm64: queued spinlocks and rw-locks Yury Norov
2017-04-10 21:35 ` Yury Norov
2017-04-10 21:35 ` [PATCH 1/3] kernel/locking: #include <asm/spinlock.h> in qrwlock.c Yury Norov
2017-04-10 21:35 ` Yury Norov
2017-04-10 21:35 ` [PATCH 2/3] asm-generic: don't #include <linux/atomic.h> in qspinlock_types.h Yury Norov
2017-04-10 21:35 ` Yury Norov
2017-04-10 21:35 ` [PATCH 3/3] arm64/locking: qspinlocks and qrwlocks support Yury Norov
2017-04-10 21:35 ` Yury Norov
2017-04-13 18:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-13 18:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-20 18:23 ` Yury Norov
2017-04-20 18:23 ` Yury Norov
2017-04-20 19:00 ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-20 19:00 ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-20 19:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-20 19:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-26 12:39 ` Yury Norov
2017-04-26 12:39 ` Yury Norov
2017-04-28 15:44 ` Will Deacon
2017-04-28 15:44 ` Will Deacon
2017-04-12 17:04 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] arm64: queued spinlocks and rw-locks Adam Wallis
2017-04-12 17:04 ` Adam Wallis
2017-04-13 10:33 ` Yury Norov [this message]
2017-04-13 10:33 ` Yury Norov
2017-04-28 15:37 ` Will Deacon
2017-04-28 15:37 ` Will Deacon
2017-04-24 13:36 ` Will Deacon
2017-04-24 13:36 ` Will Deacon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170413103309.GA1875@yury-N73SV \
--to=ynorov@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=awallis@codeaurora.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=jason.low2@hp.com \
--cc=jglauber@cavium.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.