From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
To: "Bill Rugolsky Jr." <brugolsky@telemetry-investments.com>
Cc: Paul Venezia <pvenezia@jpj.net>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: ext3 performance inconsistencies, 2.4/2.6
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 12:30:23 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0311041227180.20373-100000@home.osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20031104202037.GB30612@ti19.telemetry-investments.com>
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Bill Rugolsky Jr. wrote:
>
> Unless bonnie++ is using the _unlocked() variants, it might be an issue of
> the mutex overhead from NPTL v. LinuxThreads. Red Hat 9 has its share
> of NPTL bugs.
Hmm.. That would easily explain the differences, since NPTL will trigger
both on 2.6.0 and the RH-2.4 kernel, but not on the standard 2.4.22
kernel.
But there really should be zero contention on the stdio data structures,
so the locking would have to be _seriously_ broken to make that kind o
fdifference (not necessarily buggy, but seriously badly implemented).
A non-contended lock should be at most one locked instruction if well
done, both on LinuxThreads and NPTL.
> It is probably worth rerunning the tests with LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.4.1 on
> the Red Hat kernel.
That would be interesting.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-11-04 20:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-11-04 19:10 ext3 performance inconsistencies, 2.4/2.6 Paul Venezia
2003-11-04 19:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-11-04 20:20 ` Bill Rugolsky Jr.
2003-11-04 20:30 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2003-11-04 21:07 ` Paul Venezia
2003-11-04 21:28 ` Bill Rugolsky Jr.
2003-11-04 21:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-11-04 22:00 ` Ulrich Drepper
2003-11-04 22:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-11-04 23:48 ` Ulrich Drepper
2003-11-04 23:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-11-05 0:58 ` jlnance
2003-11-05 7:08 ` Jakub Jelinek
2003-11-04 22:19 ` Bill Rugolsky Jr.
2003-11-04 22:26 ` Bill Rugolsky Jr.
2003-11-05 7:14 ` Jakub Jelinek
2003-11-04 21:39 ` Bill Rugolsky Jr.
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.4.44.0311041227180.20373-100000@home.osdl.org \
--to=torvalds@osdl.org \
--cc=brugolsky@telemetry-investments.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pvenezia@jpj.net \
/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 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).