Why is
+struct lock_delay_config {
+u_int initial;
+u_int step;
+u_int min;
+u_int max;
+};
missing comments for its members? Are they documented anywhere else?
-Alfred
On 7/31/16 5:41 AM, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 01:49:28PM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wro
On Monday, August 01, 2016 10:08:43 PM Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 11:37:50AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 31, 2016 02:41:13 PM Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 01:49:28PM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > > After an irc
On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 11:37:50AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Sunday, July 31, 2016 02:41:13 PM Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 01:49:28PM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> > [snip]
> >
> > After an irc discussion, the following was produced (also available at:
> > https://
On Sunday, July 31, 2016 02:41:13 PM Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 01:49:28PM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> [snip]
>
> After an irc discussion, the following was produced (also available at:
> https://people.freebsd.org/~mjg/lock_backoff_complete4.diff):
>
> Differences:
>
On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 09:38:09AM -0700, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 1:36 PM, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 07:03:08AM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Did you test on any 1, 2, 4, 8 cpu machines? just to see if there are
> > > any performa
On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 02:16:59PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>
> Mateusz,
>
> just out of curiosity, have you tried to explore alternative spinlock
> implementations like a ticket lock? It would be interesting to see if
> there are any improvements to be gained there.
>
The patch is the simp
On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 1:36 PM, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 07:03:08AM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Did you test on any 1, 2, 4, 8 cpu machines? just to see if there are
> > any performance degredations on lower count CPUs?
> >
>
> I did not test on machines whic
On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 02:16:59PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>
> Mateusz,
>
> just out of curiosity, have you tried to explore alternative spinlock
> implementations like a ticket lock? It would be interesting to see if
> there are any improvements to be gained there.
Effective ticket lock i
Mateusz,
just out of curiosity, have you tried to explore alternative spinlock
implementations like a ticket lock? It would be interesting to see if
there are any improvements to be gained there.
--
Andriy Gapon
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org maili
On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 10:36:12PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 07:03:08AM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> > Also, yeah, the MOD operator in each loop could get spendy on older
> > CPUs (eg my MIPS CPUs, older ARM stuff, etc.) Is it possible to
> > achieve much the same autotu
On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 7:03 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Did you test on any 1, 2, 4, 8 cpu machines? just to see if there are
> any performance degredations on lower count CPUs?
The adaptive spinning path will never run on a uniprocessor. Except
for potential i-cache displacement you're n
On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 07:03:08AM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Did you test on any 1, 2, 4, 8 cpu machines? just to see if there are
> any performance degredations on lower count CPUs?
>
I did not test on machines which physically that few cpus, but I did
test the impact on microbenchma
Hi,
Did you test on any 1, 2, 4, 8 cpu machines? just to see if there are
any performance degredations on lower count CPUs?
Also, yeah, the MOD operator in each loop could get spendy on older
CPUs (eg my MIPS CPUs, older ARM stuff, etc.) Is it possible to
achieve much the same autotuning with pow
On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 01:49:28PM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
[snip]
After an irc discussion, the following was produced (also available at:
https://people.freebsd.org/~mjg/lock_backoff_complete4.diff):
Differences:
- uint64_t usage was converted to u_int (also see r303584)
- currently unu
On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 11:57:06AM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> The patch can be found inline below and also here:
> https://people.freebsd.org/~mjg/lock_backoff_complete.diff
>
> The previous version of the patch was posted here:
> https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2016-July/06
The patch can be found inline below and also here:
https://people.freebsd.org/~mjg/lock_backoff_complete.diff
The previous version of the patch was posted here:
https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2016-July/062320.html
This time around instead of a total hack I have something of r
16 matches
Mail list logo
