From: Andrew Lutomirski <luto@mit.edu>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
John Stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] x86-64: Micro-optimize vclock_gettime
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 16:49:00 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <BANLkTimfS1R0NYwuhDVsMvDJBWmnSU27aA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110406201442.GV21838@one.firstfloor.org>
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 04:10:22PM -0400, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
>> I ran Ingo's time-warp-test w/ 6, 7, and 8 threads on Sandy Bridge and
>> on a Xeon 5600 series chip. My C2D laptop thinks that its TSC halts
>> in idle and my only AMD system has unsynchronized TSCs.
>
> I think you should have coverage on more systems. The original
> problems that motivated the barriers were on older K8 AMD systems.
>
> You can ask people on l-k to run such tests for you if you don't
> have the hardware.
Will do, once v2 is ready.
>
>> > I did a similar attempt recently for the in kernel timers.
>> > You won't see any difference in a micro benchmark loop, but you may
>> > in a workload that dirties lots of cache between timer calls.
>>
>> For CLOCK_REALTIME they're already in one cache line. I tried the
>> prefetch and couldn't measure a speedup even after playing with
>
> Did you run a cache pig between the calls? With a tight loop it's obviously
> useless.
No, but I clflushed the cache line with vsyscall_gtod_data in it. I
think the result was just too noisy.
>
>> Agreed. In fact, I could do both in one fell swoop: have a flag for
>> the mode and have one option be "just issue the syscall." Static
>> branch stuff scares me because this stuff runs in userspace and, in
>> theory, userspace might have COWed the page with this code in it.
>
> The vdso is never cowed.
This program successfully gets SIGTRAP. I assume COW is involved.
#include <dlfcn.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <sys/mman.h>
#include <time.h>
int main()
{
volatile char *vclock_gettime;
struct timespec t;
void *vdso = dlopen("linux-vdso.so.1", RTLD_NOW | RTLD_NOLOAD);
if (!vdso) {
fprintf(stderr, "dlopen: %s\n", dlerror());
return 1;
}
vclock_gettime = dlsym(vdso, "clock_gettime");
if (!vclock_gettime) {
fprintf(stderr, "dlsym: %s\n", dlerror());
return 1;
}
if (mprotect((void*)((unsigned long)vclock_gettime & ~0xFFFUL),
4096, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE | PROT_EXEC) != 0) {
perror("mprotect");
return 1;
}
*vclock_gettime = 0xcc; /* breakpoint */
clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &t);
return 0;
}
--Andy
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-06 20:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-28 15:06 Andy Lutomirski
2011-03-28 15:06 ` [PATCH 1/6] x86-64: Optimize vread_tsc's barriers Andy Lutomirski
2011-03-29 6:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-03-28 15:06 ` [PATCH 2/6] x86-64: Don't generate cmov in vread_tsc Andy Lutomirski
2011-03-29 6:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-03-29 11:52 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2011-03-28 15:06 ` [PATCH 3/6] x86-64: Put vsyscall_gtod_data at a fixed virtual address Andy Lutomirski
2011-03-28 17:49 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-03-28 18:09 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2011-03-28 21:35 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2011-03-28 23:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-03-28 15:06 ` [PATCH 4/6] x86-64: vclock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC) can't ever see nsec < 0 Andy Lutomirski
2011-03-29 6:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-03-29 11:54 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2011-03-28 15:06 ` [PATCH 5/6] x86-64: Omit frame pointers on vread_tsc Andy Lutomirski
2011-03-29 6:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-03-28 15:06 ` [PATCH 6/6] x86-64: Turn off -pg and turn on -foptimize-sibling-calls for vDSO Andy Lutomirski
2011-03-29 6:27 ` [PATCH 0/6] x86-64: Micro-optimize vclock_gettime Ingo Molnar
2011-04-06 18:20 ` Andi Kleen
2011-04-06 20:10 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2011-04-06 20:14 ` Andi Kleen
2011-04-06 20:49 ` Andrew Lutomirski [this message]
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=BANLkTimfS1R0NYwuhDVsMvDJBWmnSU27aA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=luto@mit.edu \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.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®