mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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


  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®