From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, hugh@veritas.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, briangrant@google.com,
cgd@google.com, mbligh@google.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: pthread_create() slow for many threads; also time to revisit 64b context switch optimization?
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 14:43:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080815124350.GA26594@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87fxp8zlx3.fsf@basil.nowhere.org>
* Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:
> Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> writes:
> >
> > i find it pretty unacceptable these days that we limit any aspect of
> > pure 64-bit apps in any way to 4GB (or any other 32-bit-ish limit).
>
> It's not limited to 2GB, there's a fallback to >4GB of course. Ok
> admittedly the fallback is slow, but it's there.
Of course - what you are missing is that _10 milliseconds_ thread
creation overhead is completely unacceptable overhead: it is so bad as
if we didnt even support it.
> I would prefer to not slow down the P4s. There are **lots** of them in
> field. And they ran 64bit still quite well. [...]
Nonsense, i had such a P4 based 64-bit box and it was painful. Everyone
with half a brain used them as 32-bit machines. Nor is the
context-switch overhead in any way significant. Plus, as Arjan mentioned
it, only the earliest P4 64-bit CPUs had this problem.
> [...] Also back then I benchmarked on early K8 and it also made a
> difference there (but I admit I forgot the numbers)
that's a lot of handwaving with no actual numbers. The numbers in this
discussion show that the context-switch overhead is small and that the
overhead on perfectly good systems that hit this limit is obscurely
high.
I'd love to zap MAP_32BIT this very minute from the kernel, but you
originally shaped the whole thing in such a stupid way that makes its
elimination impossible now due to ABI constraints. It would have cost
you _nothing_ to have added MAP_64BIT_STACK back then, but the quick &
sloppy solution was to reuse MAP_32BIT for 64-bit tasks. And you are
stupid about it even now. Bleh.
The correct solution is to eliminate this flag from glibc right now, and
maybe add the MAP_64BIT_STACK flag as well, as i posted it - if anyone
with such old boxes still cares (i doubt anyone does). That flag then
will take its usual slow route. Ulrich?
Ingo
--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-15 12:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <af8810200808121736q76640cc1kb814385072fe9b29@mail.gmail.com>
2008-08-13 0:45 ` Pardo
2008-08-13 10:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-13 13:35 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-08-13 14:21 ` Ulrich Drepper
2008-08-13 14:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-13 14:36 ` Ulrich Drepper
2008-08-13 15:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-13 15:21 ` Ulrich Drepper
2008-08-13 15:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-13 15:55 ` Ulrich Drepper
2008-08-13 16:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-15 15:54 ` Jamie Lokier
2008-08-15 16:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-15 17:13 ` Ulrich Drepper
2008-08-15 17:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-15 17:23 ` Ulrich Drepper
2008-08-15 19:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-13 17:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-08-13 18:04 ` Ulrich Drepper
2008-08-13 18:16 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-08-13 18:22 ` Ulrich Drepper
2008-08-13 16:05 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-08-13 20:42 ` Andi Kleen
2008-08-13 20:56 ` Andrew Morton
2008-08-13 21:46 ` Andi Kleen
2008-08-15 12:43 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2008-08-15 13:33 ` Andi Kleen
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=20080815124350.GA26594@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=briangrant@google.com \
--cc=cgd@google.com \
--cc=drepper@redhat.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mbligh@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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