From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 06:17:40 -0700 From: William Lee Irwin III Subject: Re: 2.5.38-mm3 Message-ID: <20020926131740.GP3530@holomorphy.com> References: <3D92BE07.B6CDFE54@digeo.com> <20020926175445.B18906@in.ibm.com> <20020926122909.GN3530@holomorphy.com> <20020926181052.C18906@in.ibm.com> <20020926124244.GO3530@holomorphy.com> <20020926183558.D18906@in.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Description: brief message Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020926183558.D18906@in.ibm.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Dipankar Sarma Cc: Andrew Morton , lkml , "linux-mm@kvack.org" List-ID: On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 05:42:44AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote: >> This is only aggravated by cacheline bouncing on SMP. The reductions >> of system cpu time will doubtless be beneficial for all. On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 06:35:58PM +0530, Dipankar Sarma wrote: > On SMP, I would have thought that only sharing the fd table > while cloning tasks (CLONE_FILES) affects performance by bouncing the rwlock > cache line. Are there a lot of common workloads where this happens ? > Anyway the files_struct_rcu patch for 2.5.38 is up at > http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=8875&release_id=112473 It looks very unusual, but it is very real. Some of my prior profile results show this. I'll run a before/after profile with this either tonight or tomorrow night (it's 6:06AM PST here -- tonight is unlikely). Cheers, Bill -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/