-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 08/19/2014 05:21 PM, Andrew Theurer wrote: > >> Thanks to the feedback from Oleg, Peter, Mike, and Frederic, I >> seem to have a patch series that manages to do times() >> locklessly, and apparently correctly. > > >> >> Oleg points out that the monotonicity alone is not enough of a >> guarantee, but that should probably be attacked separately, >> since that issue is equally present with and without these >> patches... >> >> The test case below, slightly changed from the one posted by >> Spencer Candland in 2009, now runs in 11 seconds instead of 5 >> minutes. >> >> Is it worthwhile? There apparently are some real workloads that >> call times() a lot, and I believe Sanjay and Andrew have one >> sitting around. > > Thanks for doing this. When running a OLTP workload in a KVM VM, > we saw a 71% increase in performance! do_sys_times() was a big > bottleneck for us.
Thanks Andrew, a 71% performance increase seems like it would be enough to justify merging these patches... Peter, Ingo, Andrew, Do any of you have an objection to these patches? Which tree should I merge them through? I am happy to resubmit them against any tree, just let me know where you want the patches to go. thanks, Rik - -- All rights reversed -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUB2AiAAoJEM553pKExN6DlKsH/RygM0SAcKcqbhk7qbKgQsFI fe9mzJeDg5X2OVW1LuKKhpdo0wPiJ6arg3s2kWnJ8YuToMlIYjFwh9V+fwk1p7bV 4X8KYEK1DyJux8ZYwOBXlZORL+mE30scwuOF8B0sY+TepiRHeorv0srTIXgJfGyJ avv95X/hx5JSqjAeRomHPmIX8VzgbHTXPEzWxVj+64qehI63CqyLGXXSlHPvFL4D uhIRvCC4WxKNldUX20HZFUlQETsJttWoM14SiT1HZbfZNJxDMkD6kjcNl7Uimw9j gVQeE4qy5OkdY1RSsVN35mg+mGA8kzUoQV0aEkogXwbJYNB+wFQ7OEupA1BKiGw= =6lUC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- 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/
