Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 23 Mar 2003 08:54:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 23 Mar 2003 08:54:25 -0500 Received: from pc2-cwma1-4-cust86.swan.cable.ntl.com ([213.105.254.86]:6818 "EHLO irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 23 Mar 2003 08:54:22 -0500 Subject: Re: smp overhead, and rwlocks considered harmful From: Alan Cox To: Michael Vergoz Cc: Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: <20030323133332.4693024e.mvergoz@sysdoor.com> References: <20030322175816.225a1f23.akpm@digeo.com> <20030323133332.4693024e.mvergoz@sysdoor.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: Message-Id: <1048432671.10727.12.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-5) Date: 23 Mar 2003 15:17:51 +0000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 944 Lines: 21 On Sun, 2003-03-23 at 12:33, Michael Vergoz wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > I would like to noticed to you that the SMP capacity can't be used on one process under Linux. > > when you run 'time dd if=/dev/zero of=foo bs=1 count=1M', the capacity of 1 processor will > use since your command sets is executed in ONE process. Your dd is benchmarking the lock operations in the C library I suspect. The kernel will happily use both processors and a given syscall can evne start on one cpu and complete on another, or have the IRQ tasks executed on its behalf on another CPU. There are *good* reasons btw for avoiding splitting stuff too far, the cost of copying data between processor caches is very high. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/