Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756774Ab2F0NBn (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Jun 2012 09:01:43 -0400 Received: from youngberry.canonical.com ([91.189.89.112]:56453 "EHLO youngberry.canonical.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755290Ab2F0NBl (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Jun 2012 09:01:41 -0400 Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 08:01:25 -0500 From: Serge Hallyn To: "Dmitry V. Levin" Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Andrew Morton , KOSAKI Motohiro , Doug Ledford , Al Viro , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Kirill A. Shutemov" Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH] CLONE_NEWIPC and exit_group() Message-ID: <20120627130125.GA23431@sergelap> References: <20120626120425.GA10275@otc-wbsnb-06> <20120627123455.GA32171@altlinux.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120627123455.GA32171@altlinux.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1579 Lines: 57 Quoting Dmitry V. Levin (ldv@altlinux.org): > Hi, > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 03:04:26PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > Patch to move kern_unmount() out of exit_group() code path is below. > > Dmitry, could you check if it's beneficial for your use-case? > > I've benchmarked a slightly modified test which is closer to our use-case > (child processes are forked sequentially): Did you run this in parallel, perhaps with numcpus/2 jobs plus a hackbench running on the side? > #define _GNU_SOURCE > #include > #include > #include > #include > > int > main(void) > { > int i; > for (i = 0; i < 1024; i++) { > if (fork()) { > wait(NULL); > continue; > } > unshare(CLONE_NEWIPC); > exit(0); > } > return 0; > } > > On 3.4.4 with rcu_barrier patch: > 0.09user 0.00system 0:32.77elapsed 0%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 1472maxresident)k > 0inputs+0outputs (0major+38017minor)pagefaults 0swaps > > On 3.4.4 with rcu_barrier patch and your new patch: > 0.00user 0.06system 0:32.77elapsed 0%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 1472maxresident)k > 0inputs+0outputs (0major+38017minor)pagefaults 0swaps > > So there is a clear difference in accounting (user vs system) Yup, I'd argue that's a bad thing :) > but no > noticeable difference in the real time. Thanks for testing! -serge -- 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/