lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jan]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: aim7 performance regression by commit 5a50508 report from LKP
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 09:44:00AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> > [...]
>
> Very nice measurements and analysis, thanks!
>
> > As stated above, anybody can have a chance to own the lock in
> > mutex once somebody release the lock. Well, there is only one
> > to own the lock in rwsem write lock, and the one is known
> > already: the one in the head of wait list. That would result
> > to more contention in rwsem write lock case, especially if the
> > one _will_ own the lock is not running now.
>
> I think we should allow lock-steal between rwsem writers - that
> will not hurt fairness as most rwsem fairness concerns relate to
> reader vs. writer fairness.

Agreed, and I'm sure this will improve performance and may make this
performance regression go away.

David, is that Ok to you? If so, I may have a try.

>
> Am I correct to assume that all relevant users in this workload
> are down_write() users?

Yes, as commit 5a50508 just convert all mutex to down_write.

Thanks.

--yliu
>
> You can see the type of lock use in:
>
> perf record -g
> perf report
>
> I bet that allowing rwsem writer lock-steal would improve other
> workloads as well.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-01-29 10:43    [W:0.051 / U:0.756 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site