Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753027AbZK3LFg (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Nov 2009 06:05:36 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751633AbZK3LFg (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Nov 2009 06:05:36 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:37167 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750956AbZK3LFf (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Nov 2009 06:05:35 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/12] Maintain preemptability count even for !CONFIG_PREEMPT kernels From: Peter Zijlstra To: Gleb Natapov Cc: Christoph Lameter , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, avi@redhat.com, mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com, riel@redhat.com In-Reply-To: <1259578793.20516.130.camel@laptop> References: <1258985167-29178-1-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com> <1258985167-29178-11-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com> <1258990455.4531.594.camel@laptop> <20091123155851.GU2999@redhat.com> <20091124071250.GC2999@redhat.com> <20091130105612.GF30150@redhat.com> <20091130105812.GG30150@redhat.com> <1259578793.20516.130.camel@laptop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:05:14 +0100 Message-ID: <1259579114.20516.136.camel@laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1286 Lines: 29 On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 11:59 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 12:58 +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 12:56:12PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 09:14:03AM -0600, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > > > On Tue, 24 Nov 2009, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 11:30:02AM -0600, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > > > > > This adds significant overhead for the !PREEMPT case adding lots of code > > > > > > in critical paths all over the place. > > > > > I want to measure it. Can you suggest benchmarks to try? > > > > > > > > AIM9 (reaim9)? > > > Below are results for kernel 2.6.32-rc8 with and without the patch (only > > > this single patch is applied). > > > > > Forgot to tell. The results are average between 5 different runs. > > Would be good to also report the variance over those 5 runs, allows us > to see if the difference is within the noise. Got pointed to the fact that there is a stddev column right there. Must be Monday or something ;-) -- 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/