From: Paul Venezia <pvenezia@jpj.net>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Cc: "Bill Rugolsky Jr." <brugolsky@telemetry-investments.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ext3 performance inconsistencies, 2.4/2.6
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 16:07:43 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1067980063.24247.23.camel@d8000> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0311041227180.20373-100000@home.osdl.org>
On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 15:30, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 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.
Good point...
A truncated strace under 2.4.22 is here:
http://groove.jpj.net/bonnie-strace-trunc
It's incomplete, but shows the putc calls.
> > It is probably worth rerunning the tests with LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.4.1 on
> > the Red Hat kernel.
>
> That would be interesting.
Tests are running now. Updates as events warrant.
-Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-11-04 21:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-11-04 19:10 Paul Venezia
2003-11-04 19:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-11-04 20:20 ` Bill Rugolsky Jr.
2003-11-04 20:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-11-04 21:07 ` Paul Venezia [this message]
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=1067980063.24247.23.camel@d8000 \
--to=pvenezia@jpj.net \
--cc=brugolsky@telemetry-investments.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®