lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Mar]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/5] Generic smp_call_function(), improvements, and smp_call_function_single()

* Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> wrote:

> which is pretty much identical to io-cpu-affinity, except it uses
> kernel threads for completion.
>
> The reason why I dropped the kthread approach is that it was slower.
> Time from signal to run was about 33% faster with IPI than with
> wake_up_process(). Doing benchmark runs, and the IPI approach won
> hands down in cache misses as well.

with irq threads we'll have all irq context run in kthread context
again. Could you show me how you measured the performance of the kthread
approach versus the raw-IPI approach?

we can do a million kthread context switches per CPU per second, so
kthread context-switch cost cannot be a true performance limit, unless
you micro-benchmarked this.

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-03-27 11:11    [W:0.131 / U:0.004 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site