Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 27 Feb 2002 16:31:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 27 Feb 2002 16:30:49 -0500 Received: from e21.nc.us.ibm.com ([32.97.136.227]:12672 "EHLO e21.nc.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 27 Feb 2002 16:30:30 -0500 Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] lockmeter results comparing 2.4.17, 2.5.3, and 2.5.5 To: lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, viro@math.psu.edu X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.3 (Intl) 21 March 2000 Message-ID: From: "Niels Christiansen" Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 15:30:25 -0600 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D04NM104/04/M/IBM(Release 5.0.9 |November 16, 2001) at 02/27/2002 04:30:29 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andrew Morton wrote: > I have a concern about the lockmeter results. Lockmeter appears > to be measuring lock frequency and hold times and contention. But > is it measuring the cost of the cacheline transfers? No. > I expect that with delayed allocation and radix-tree pagecache, one > of the major remaining bottlenecks will be ownership of the superblock > semaphore's cacheline. Is this measurable? When you ask if this is measurable, exactly what do you mean? The cost of cacheline transfers? Expressed in which unit of measure? Bottlenecks? If the data you are after is available, a tool can surely be made to capture and present it... -nc- - 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/