From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [IPv6:2001:4978:20e::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3rFwBv4GcYzDqVW for ; Fri, 27 May 2016 02:51:03 +1000 (AEST) Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 18:50:47 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Pan Xinhui Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au, mingo@redhat.com, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, jeremy@goop.org, chrisw@sous-sol.org, akataria@vmware.com, rusty@rustcorp.com.au Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] powerpc use pv-qpsinlock as the default spinlock implemention Message-ID: <20160526165047.GM3206@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <1464164289-6124-1-git-send-email-xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1464164289-6124-1-git-send-email-xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 04:18:03PM +0800, Pan Xinhui wrote: > _____test________________spinlcok______________pv-qspinlcok_____ > |futex hash | 556370 ops | 629634 ops | > |futex lock-pi | 362 ops | 367 ops | > > scheduler test: > Test how many loops of schedule() can finish within 10 seconds on all cpus. > > _____test________________spinlcok______________pv-qspinlcok_____ > |schedule() loops| 322811921 | 311449290 | > > kernel compiling test: > build a linux kernel image to see how long it took > > _____test________________spinlcok______________pv-qspinlcok_____ > | compiling takes| 22m | 22m | s/spinlcok/spinlock/ Is 'spinlcok' the current test-and-set lock? And what about regular qspinlock, in case of !SHARED_PROCESSOR?