From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1758327AbcBXUU7 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 24 Feb 2016 15:20:59 -0500
Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:46832 "EHLO mail.zytor.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753607AbcBXUU5 (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 24 Feb 2016 15:20:57 -0500
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
In-Reply-To: <1452699925.6549.1456286963485.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
References: <1456270120-7560-1-git-send-email-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> <56CD091A.4060009@zytor.com> <1452699925.6549.1456286963485.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/5] getcpu_cache system call for 4.6
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 12:07:28 -0800
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>, Andrew Hunter <ahh@google.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Dave Watson <davejwatson@fb.com>,
        Chris Lameter <cl@linux.com>, Ben Maurer <bmaurer@fb.com>,
        rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <F6BC367F-127F-4254-8E4E-E7BF60A027F3@zytor.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On February 23, 2016 8:09:23 PM PST, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> wrote:
>----- On Feb 23, 2016, at 8:36 PM, H. Peter Anvin hpa@zytor.com wrote:
>
>> On 02/23/2016 03:28 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> Here is a patchset implementing a cache for the CPU number of the
>>> currently running thread in user-space.
>>> 
>>> Benchmarks comparing this approach to a getcpu based on system call
>on
>>> ARM show a 44x speedup. They show a 14x speedup on x86-64 compared
>to
>>> executing lsl from a vDSO through glibc.
>>> 
>>> I'm added a man page in the changelog of patch 1/3, which shows an
>>> example usage of this new system call.
>>> 
>>> This series is based on v4.5-rc5, submitted for Linux 4.6.
>>> 
>>> Feedback is welcome,
>>> 
>> 
>> What is the resulting context switch overhead?
>
>The getcpu_cache only adds code to the thread migration path,
>and to the resume notifier. The context switch path per se is
>untouched. I would therefore expect the overhead on context
>switch to be within the noise, except if stuff like hackbench
>would be so sensitive to the size of struct task_struct that
>a single extra pointer added at the end of struct task_struct
>would throw off the benchmarks.
>
>Is that what you are concerned about ?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Mathieu

Yes, I'd like to see numbers.  It is way easy to handwave small changes away, but they add up over time.  Without numbers it is a bit hard to quantify the pro vs con.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse brevity and formatting.