From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752718AbcE0Kxe (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 May 2016 06:53:34 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:34515 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751660AbcE0Kxd (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 May 2016 06:53:33 -0400 Message-Id: <201605271053.u4RAnqoS014680@mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com> X-IBM-Helo: d28dlp03.in.ibm.com X-IBM-MailFrom: xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com X-IBM-RcptTo: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Fri, 27 May 2016 18:52:58 +0800 From: xinhui User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Zijlstra CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au, mingo@redhat.com, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, jeremy@goop.org, chrisw@sous-sol.org, akataria@vmware.com, rusty@rustcorp.com.au Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] powerpc use pv-qpsinlock as the default spinlock implemention References: <1464164289-6124-1-git-send-email-xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20160526165047.GM3206@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> In-Reply-To: <20160526165047.GM3206@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 16052710-0060-0000-0000-00000091281F X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 16052710-0061-0000-0000-00000D5D256C X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2016-05-27_06:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=8 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1604210000 definitions=main-1605270125 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2016年05月27日 00:50, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 04:18:03PM +0800, Pan Xinhui wrote: > >> _____test________________spinlcok______________pv-qspinlcok_____ >> |futex hash | 556370 ops | 629634 ops | >> |futex lock-pi | 362 ops | 367 ops | >> >> scheduler test: >> Test how many loops of schedule() can finish within 10 seconds on all cpus. >> >> _____test________________spinlcok______________pv-qspinlcok_____ >> |schedule() loops| 322811921 | 311449290 | >> >> kernel compiling test: >> build a linux kernel image to see how long it took >> >> _____test________________spinlcok______________pv-qspinlcok_____ >> | compiling takes| 22m | 22m | > > > s/spinlcok/spinlock/ > Oh, foolish mistake...sorry > Is 'spinlcok' the current test-and-set lock? > Yes. I will describe it in a clear way in the next patchset. > And what about regular qspinlock, in case of !SHARED_PROCESSOR? > You mean the test results on powerNV? yes, I make a kernel build with !SHARED_PROCESSOR. and do perf tests and scheduler tests on same machine(32 cpus). performance is better than current spinlock _____test________________spinlock________________qspinlock_____ |futex hash | 533060 ops | 541513 ops | |futex lock-pi | 357 ops | 356 ops | _____test________________spinlock________________qspinlock_____ |schedule() loops| 337691713 | 361935207 | NOTE: I have updated the scheduler test tools, and the new performance test results show that both pv-spinlock and qspinlock is better than current spinlock. I will also update the test result in my next patchset. thanks xinhui