From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 17 May 2002 16:30:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 17 May 2002 16:30:34 -0400 Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.129]:19398 "EHLO e31.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 17 May 2002 16:30:33 -0400 Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 02:03:57 +0530 From: Dipankar Sarma To: "David S. Miller" Cc: ak@muc.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 16-CPU #s for lockfree rtcache (rt_rcu) Message-ID: <20020518020357.B16829@in.ibm.com> Reply-To: dipankar@in.ibm.com In-Reply-To: <20020517214433.A15556@in.ibm.com> <20020517.094624.68229633.davem@redhat.com> <20020517.122519.102199743.davem@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 17, 2002 at 12:25:19PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Andi Kleen > Date: 17 May 2002 21:25:16 +0200 > > "David S. Miller" writes: > > > Provide the data, it will be interesting. > > I bet the numbers would be much better if the x86 > do_gettimeofday() was converted to a lockless version first ... > Currently it is bouncing around its readlock for every incoming packet. > > That is true. But right now we are trying to analyze the effects of > his patch all by itself. Yes, that is a another problem needs addressing. BTW, do_gettimeofday() also shows up moderately significant in profile of 8-CPU webserver benchmark. I will address xtime_lock separately. Thanks -- Dipankar Sarma http://lse.sourceforge.net Linux Technology Center, IBM Software Lab, Bangalore, India.