On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 10:06:55AM -0600, Gage Eads wrote: > This commit adds support for non-blocking (linked list based) stack mempool > handler. > > In mempool_perf_autotest the lock-based stack outperforms the > non-blocking handler for certain lcore/alloc count/free count > combinations*, however: > - For applications with preemptible pthreads, a lock-based stack's > worst-case performance (i.e. one thread being preempted while > holding the spinlock) is much worse than the non-blocking stack's. > - Using per-thread mempool caches will largely mitigate the performance > difference. > > *Test setup: x86_64 build with default config, dual-socket Xeon E5-2699 v4, > running on isolcpus cores with a tickless scheduler. The lock-based stack's > rate_persec was 0.6x-3.5x the non-blocking stack's. > > Signed-off-by: Gage Eads <gage.e...@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.m...@6wind.com>
