From: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>,
hch@infradead.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, arjan@infradead.org,
mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org,
arjanv@infradead.org, nico@cam.org, jes@trained-monkey.org,
zwane@arm.linux.org.uk, oleg@tv-sign.ru, dhowells@redhat.com,
bcrl@kvack.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, ak@suse.de,
rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk
Subject: Moore's law (was Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4)
Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 00:33:13 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051226003313.GB2440@ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051225150445.0eae9dd7.akpm@osdl.org>
Hi!
> Another example: Ingo's VFS stresstest which is hitting i_sem hard: it only
> does ~8000 ops/sec on an 8-way, and it's an artificial microbenchmark which
> is _designed_ to hit that lock hard. So if/when i_sem is converted to a
> mutex, I figure that the benefits to ARM in that workload will be about a
> 0.01% performance increase. ie: about two hours' worth of Moore's law in a
> dopey microbenchmark.
:-) Expressing performance increases in Moore's hours seems like
neat trick. OTOH I do not think it is valid any more. Single-threaded
performance stopped increasing 2 years ago AFAICS. Plus people are
pushing Linux onto smaller machines, that were unavailable 2 years
ago.
Pavel
--
Thanks, Sharp!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-01-05 14:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-12-22 11:41 [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4 Ingo Molnar
2005-12-22 11:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2005-12-22 12:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-12-22 15:34 ` Nicolas Pitre
2005-12-22 15:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-12-22 16:32 ` Nicolas Pitre
2005-12-22 16:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-12-22 16:58 ` Russell King
2005-12-22 21:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-12-22 21:26 ` Russell King
2005-12-22 21:27 ` Nicolas Pitre
2005-12-22 21:37 ` [patch 1/2] mutex subsystem: basic per arch fast path primitives Nicolas Pitre
2005-12-22 21:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2005-12-22 21:40 ` [patch 2/2] mutex subsystem: use the per architecture fast path lock_unlock defines Nicolas Pitre
2005-12-22 21:54 ` [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4 Ingo Molnar
2005-12-22 16:58 ` Nicolas Pitre
2005-12-22 17:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2005-12-22 17:33 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-12-22 18:24 ` Nicolas Pitre
2005-12-22 11:54 ` Andrew Morton
2005-12-22 12:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-12-22 13:07 ` Andrew Morton
2005-12-22 13:23 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-12-22 13:44 ` Andrew Morton
2005-12-22 14:11 ` Alan Cox
2005-12-22 23:30 ` Andrew Morton
2005-12-22 23:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
[not found] ` <32801.10.10.10.28.1135295357.squirrel@linux1>
2005-12-22 23:49 ` Sean
2005-12-22 23:53 ` Randy.Dunlap
[not found] ` <50572.10.10.10.28.1135296023.squirrel@linux1>
2005-12-23 0:00 ` Sean
2005-12-23 0:00 ` Steven Rostedt
[not found] ` <20051222221311.2f6056ec.akpm@osdl.org>
2005-12-23 14:24 ` Nicolas Pitre
2005-12-23 14:51 ` Andrew Morton
2005-12-23 14:57 ` Russell King
2005-12-23 15:04 ` Xavier Bestel
2005-12-23 15:27 ` Andrew Morton
2005-12-23 15:00 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-01-03 17:54 ` Abhijit Bhopatkar
2005-12-25 16:08 ` Roman Zippel
2005-12-25 22:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-12-26 21:49 ` Roman Zippel
2005-12-25 23:04 ` Andrew Morton
2005-12-25 23:22 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-12-26 10:35 ` Andrew Morton
2005-12-26 10:42 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-12-26 11:11 ` Andrew Morton
2005-12-26 17:15 ` Mike Galbraith
2005-12-26 17:44 ` Lee Revell
2005-12-27 0:32 ` David Lang
2005-12-26 18:15 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-12-27 14:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-12-27 23:02 ` Andrew Morton
2005-12-26 0:33 ` Pavel Machek [this message]
2006-01-05 15:30 ` Moore's law (was Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4) Andi Kleen
2006-01-05 19:08 ` Pavel Machek
2005-12-26 15:29 ` [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4 Nicolas Pitre
2005-12-22 15:46 ` Thomas Gleixner
2005-12-22 17:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-12-22 20:09 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-12-22 17:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2005-12-22 15:19 ` Nicolas Pitre
2005-12-22 21:43 ` Paul Mackerras
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=20051226003313.GB2440@ucw.cz \
--to=pavel@suse.cz \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=arjanv@infradead.org \
--cc=bcrl@kvack.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jes@trained-monkey.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nico@cam.org \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
--cc=zippel@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=zwane@arm.linux.org.uk \
/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®