Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933629AbZJMJrN (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Oct 2009 05:47:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755865AbZJMJrN (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Oct 2009 05:47:13 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.45.13]:43019 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755365AbZJMJrM (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Oct 2009 05:47:12 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=date:from:x-x-sender:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:user-agent:mime-version:content-type:x-system-of-record; b=i6/sR9nBkk6ruCqUeT+FAIfLTJEEvfKJE70suLEPK3L2nuojGpNqNH31ruA/RP3+L 9XLQ3gmEhq3BZWob3pvQQ== Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 02:45:56 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes X-X-Sender: rientjes@chino.kir.corp.google.com To: Pekka Enberg cc: Tejun Heo , Christoph Lameter , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mathieu Desnoyers , Mel Gorman , Zhang Yanmin Subject: Re: [this_cpu_xx V6 7/7] this_cpu: slub aggressive use of this_cpu operations in the hotpaths In-Reply-To: <84144f020910120614r529d8e4em9babe83a90e9371f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <20091007211024.442168959@gentwo.org> <20091007211053.378634196@gentwo.org> <4AD307A5.105@kernel.org> <84144f020910120614r529d8e4em9babe83a90e9371f@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (DEB 882 2007-12-20) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-System-Of-Record: true Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1193 Lines: 24 On Mon, 12 Oct 2009, Pekka Enberg wrote: > The patch looks sane to me but the changelog contains no relevant > numbers on performance. I am fine with the patch going in -percpu but > the patch probably needs some more beating performance-wise before it > can go into .33. I'm CC'ing some more people who are known to do SLAB > performance testing just in case they're interested in looking at the > patch. In any case, > I ran 60-second netperf TCP_RR benchmarks with various thread counts over two machines, both four quad-core Opterons. I ran the trials ten times each with both vanilla per-cpu#for-next at 9288f99 and with v6 of this patchset. The transfer rates were virtually identical showing no improvement or regression with this patchset in this benchmark. [ As I reported in http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123839191416472, this benchmark continues to be the most significant regression slub has compared to slab. ] -- 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/