From: "Richard B. Johnson" <root@chaos.analogic.com> To: Roger Larsson <roger.larsson@norran.net> Cc: Linux kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Re: SMP spin-locks Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 17:05:07 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview] Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.1010614165153.16430A-100000@chaos.analogic.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <200106142045.f5EKjLI14289@mailf.telia.com> On Thu, 14 Jun 2001, Roger Larsson wrote: > Hi, > > Wait a minute... > > Spinlocks on a embedded system? Is it _really_ SMP? > The embedded system is not SMP. However, there is definite advantage to using an unmodified kernel that may/may-not have been compiled for SMP. Of course spin-locks are used to prevent interrupts from screwing up buffer pointers, etc. > What kind of performance problem do you have? The problem is that a data acquisition board across the PCI bus gives a data transfer rate of 10 to 11 megabytes per second with a UP kernel, and the transfer drops to 5-6 megabytes per second with a SMP kernel. The ISR is really simple and copies data, that's all. The 'read()' routine uses a spinlock when it modifies pointers. I started to look into where all the CPU clocks were going. The SMP spinlock code is where it's going. There is often contention for the lock because interrupts normally occur at 50 to 60 kHz. When there is contention, a very long........jump occurs into the test.lock segment. I think this is flushing queues. Cheers, Dick Johnson Penguin : Linux version 2.4.1 on an i686 machine (799.53 BogoMips). "Memory is like gasoline. You use it up when you are running. Of course you get it all back when you reboot..."; Actual explanation obtained from the Micro$oft help desk.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-06-14 21:05 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2001-06-14 17:26 Richard B. Johnson 2001-06-14 17:32 ` David S. Miller 2001-06-14 17:35 ` Kurt Garloff 2001-06-15 6:51 ` Doug Ledford 2001-06-14 20:42 ` Roger Larsson 2001-06-14 21:05 ` Richard B. Johnson [this message] 2001-06-14 21:30 ` Roger Larsson 2001-06-15 3:21 ` Richard B. Johnson 2001-06-15 2:33 ` David Lang 2001-06-15 10:35 ` David Schwartz 2001-06-15 13:26 ` Richard B. Johnson 2001-06-15 12:10 ` Ingo Oeser 2001-06-15 12:49 ` Richard B. Johnson 2001-06-15 15:52 ` Pavel Machek
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=Pine.LNX.3.95.1010614165153.16430A-100000@chaos.analogic.com \ --to=root@chaos.analogic.com \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=roger.larsson@norran.net \ --subject='Re: SMP spin-locks' \ /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
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).