mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: "Chen, Dennis (SRDC SW)" <Dennis1.Chen@amd.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: semaphore and mutex in current Linux kernel (3.2.2)
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 14:19:43 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120401121943.GA11893@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <491D6B4EAD0A714894D8AD22F4BDE0439F94AB@SCYBEXDAG02.amd.com>


* Chen, Dennis (SRDC SW) <Dennis1.Chen@amd.com> wrote:

> Documentation/mutex-design.txt:
> 
> "- 'struct mutex' is smaller on most architectures: E.g. on x86,
>    'struct semaphore' is 20 bytes, 'struct mutex' is 16 bytes.
>    A smaller structure size means less RAM footprint, and better
>    CPU-cache utilization."
> ================================================================
>
> Now in my x86-64 32-bit Linux environment, 'struct semaphone' 
> is 16 bytes, 'struct mutex' is 20 bytes. So seems the RAM 
> footprint advantages are not there...

It got larger due to the adaptive spin-mutex performance 
optimization.

> For the performance advantages followed, I don't have the 
> ./test-mutex and maybe the testing environment, so haven't the 
> 1st hand data for this item...

Well, a way to reproduce that would be to find a lock_mutex 
intense workload ('perf top -g', etc.), and then changing back 
the underlying mutex to a semaphore, and measure the performance 
of the two primitives.

Thanks,

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2012-04-01 12:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-04-01  9:56 Chen, Dennis (SRDC SW)
2012-04-01 12:19 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2012-04-02 15:28   ` Chen, Dennis (SRDC SW)
2012-04-03  7:52     ` Ingo Molnar
2012-04-05  8:37       ` Chen, Dennis (SRDC SW)
2012-04-05 14:15         ` Clemens Ladisch
2012-04-06  9:45           ` Chen, Dennis (SRDC SW)
2012-04-06 10:10             ` Clemens Ladisch
2012-04-06 17:47               ` Chen, Dennis (SRDC SW)
2012-04-09 18:45                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-11  5:04                   ` Chen, Dennis (SRDC SW)
2012-04-11 17:30                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-12  9:42                       ` Chen, Dennis (SRDC SW)
2012-04-12 15:18                         ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-13 14:15                           ` Chen, Dennis (SRDC SW)
2012-04-13 18:43                             ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-04-16  8:33                               ` [PATCH 0/2] tools perf: Add a new benchmark tool for semaphore/mutex Chen, Dennis (SRDC SW)
2012-04-16  9:24                                 ` Ingo Molnar
2012-04-16 14:10                                   ` Chen, Dennis (SRDC SW)

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=20120401121943.GA11893@gmail.com \
    --to=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=Dennis1.Chen@amd.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    /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

Powered by JetHome