Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 07:52:53 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 07:52:43 -0500 Received: from samba.sourceforge.net ([198.186.203.85]:4870 "HELO lists.samba.org") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 07:52:33 -0500 Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 22:27:26 +1100 From: Anton Blanchard To: "Martin J. Bligh" Cc: lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 10.31 second kernel compile Message-ID: <20020314112725.GA2008@krispykreme> In-Reply-To: <20020313085217.GA11658@krispykreme> <460695164.1016001894@[10.10.2.3]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <460695164.1016001894@[10.10.2.3]> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Wow! Is this box NUMA (what latency ratio, mem access speeds, etc?), or > can you really build a straight SMP that big? The system has two cpus on a chip sharing a l2 cache, 4 of these chips built into a multichip module and up to 4 of these modules connected together. The l3 and memory is distributed amongst the modules. As you can imagine there is a hierarchy of latencies but the ratio is quite low. > OK, now I'm going to have to build a bigger system ;-) I've got 8 more cpus in store too :) > I have some strange plans for the lru stuff, but it'll take me a while. > I'm curious as to why lru_cache_del is so much lower in your list than > add, whereas the ratio for me is about: > > 719 lru_cache_add 7.8152 > 477 lru_cache_del 21.6818 Not sure about that. > > 6714 .local_flush_tlb_range ppc64 specific > > 2773 .local_flush_tlb_page ppc64 specific > > Do you know what's causing the tlb flushes? Just context switches? Thats due to the way we manipulate the ppc hashed page table. Every time we update the linux page tables we have to update the hashed page table. There are some obvious optimisations we need to make, hopefully then this will go away. The tlb flushes here are probably process exits and things like COW faults. > > 554 .d_lookup > > Did you try the dcache patches? Not for this, I did do some benchmarking of the RCU dcache patches a while ago which I should post. > Can you publish lockmeter stats? I didnt get a chance to run lockmeter, I tend to use the kernel profiler and use a hacked readprofile (originally from tridge) that displays profile hits vs assembly instruction. Thats usually good enough to work out which spinlocks are a problem. Anton - 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/