On 25 April 2013 02:28, Andre Oppermann <an...@freebsd.org> wrote: > Again one has to be really careful drawing any firm conclusions from this > as it was measured on a Pentium4 and UP kernel (GENERIC would add WITNESS > and INVARIANT overhead as well). > > The Pentium4 is about the worst micro-architecture when it comes to locks > and easily regresses. At the same time modern Intel Core i[3-7] and AMD64 > may actually improve with these changes. Unless more recent micro-archs > have been shown to exhibit the same regression we can't claim this change > was bad (other than for Pentium4).
Sure, but he's done the heavy lifting. It'll be interesting to compare these results on a variety of platforms, not just the modern desktop/server style CPUs. Eg, if someone has the time, spinning this stuff up on the multi-core MIPS stuff in the netperf cluster (that's supposed to be a network forwarding engine) would be nice. And to be honest - having a set of performance checks for the same SVN revision but different physical machines is a good comparison point. It may be that we can start classifying different kinds of platform silliness from this which could lead to some better coding guidelines. Adrian _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
