linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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>

  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