On Mon, 2013-09-30 at 15:35 -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > On 09/30/2013 03:23 PM, Tim Chen wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-09-30 at 20:14 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:10:27AM -0700, Tim Chen wrote: > >>> Here's the exim workload data: > >>> > >>> rwsem improvment: > >>> Waimain's patch: +2.0% > >>> Alex+Tim's patchset: +4.8% > >>> Waiman+Alex+Tim: +5.3% > >>> > >>> convert rwsem to rwlock_t for root anon_vma lock > >>> Ingo's patch +11.7% > >>> > >> What happens if you stuff Waiman's qrwlock patches on top of that? > >> admittedly and oft mentioned in this thread, our current rwlock_t is > >> somewhat suboptimal under a number of conditions. > > I've tested with Waiman's qrwlock patches on top of Ingo's patches. > > It does not affect the throughput for exim and I still get > > about +11.7% throughput change (same as with Ingo's patch only). > > > > Tim > > > > My qrwlock doesn't enable qrwlock by default. You have to use menuconfig > to explicitly enable it. Have you done that when you build the test > kernel? I am thinking of explicitly enabling it for x86 if the anon-vma > lock is converted back to a rwlock. >
Yes, I have explicitly enabled it during my testing. Thanks. Tim -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
