Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S272415AbTGaG3k (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Jul 2003 02:29:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S272424AbTGaG3k (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Jul 2003 02:29:40 -0400 Received: from dvmwest.gt.owl.de ([62.52.24.140]:2013 "EHLO dvmwest.gt.owl.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S272415AbTGaG3h (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Jul 2003 02:29:37 -0400 Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 08:29:36 +0200 From: Jan-Benedict Glaw To: lkml Subject: Re: TSCs are a no-no on i386 Message-ID: <20030731062936.GN1873@lug-owl.de> Mail-Followup-To: lkml References: <20030730135623.GA1873@lug-owl.de> <20030730181006.GB21734@fs.tum.de> <20030730183033.GA970@matchmail.com> <20030730184529.GE21734@fs.tum.de> <20030730202822.GG1873@lug-owl.de> <20030730215032.GA18892@vana.vc.cvut.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="8aUgEFSDYDA6u3T0" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030730215032.GA18892@vana.vc.cvut.cz> X-Operating-System: Linux mail 2.4.18 X-gpg-fingerprint: 250D 3BCF 7127 0D8C A444 A961 1DBD 5E75 8399 E1BB X-gpg-key: wwwkeys.de.pgp.net User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1932 Lines: 52 --8aUgEFSDYDA6u3T0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 2003-07-30 23:50:32 +0200, Petr Vandrovec wrote in message <20030730215032.GA18892@vana.vc.cvut.cz>: > On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 10:28:22PM +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote: > > On Wed, 2003-07-30 20:45:29 +0200, Adrian Bunk > And yes, it speeds some workloads a lot. Best to look at code, > with these instructions you can do couple of operations without > doing IPC to synchronize with other threads. Which ones? I am always told "it's faster, then", but nobody really proofed that. Take some multithreadded apps. How often do they *really* lock/unlock mutexes, and in which ratio does that compare to their "normal" computing needs? If an application's main job is locking/unlocking mutexes, then the author should possibly think about that. If it's main task is to do the computational stuff, then I've got no (real) problem with this extra Linux^Wtax, esp. on those faster boxes... MfG, JBG --=20 Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw@lug-owl.de . +49-172-7608481 "Eine Freie Meinung in einem Freien Kopf | Gegen Zensur | Gegen Krieg fuer einen Freien Staat voll Freier B=FCrger" | im Internet! | im Ira= k! ret =3D do_actions((curr | FREE_SPEECH) & ~(IRAQ_WAR_2 | DRM | TCPA)); --8aUgEFSDYDA6u3T0 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD4DBQE/KLdQHb1edYOZ4bsRAuS1AJYk140llZ42Zfq6Y/I6GslQBiqZAJ9BbeLN 3aRBr4/y6cerXbarCK5ohQ== =aVWy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --8aUgEFSDYDA6u3T0-- - 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/