Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 12 Jul 1999 23:01:38 +0100 (BST)
From:      Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com>
To:        Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>
Cc:        Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, Luoqi Chen <luoqi@watermarkgroup.com>, jeremyp@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, mike@ducky.net
Subject:   Re: Ack!  Wrong results.
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.10.9907122259540.58023-100000@salmon.nlsystems.com>
In-Reply-To: <199907121812.LAA70732@apollo.backplane.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 12 Jul 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote:

>     How did that happen?!!!  Argg..    I didn't save the email.
> 
>     Here are better results:
> 
>     Empty loop:
> 
> 	mode 0    9.21 ns/loop nproc=1 lcks=EMPTY
> 
>     With and without lock prefix, one and two processes
> 
> 	mode 1   16.48 ns/loop nproc=1 lcks=no
> 	mode 2   23.65 ns/loop nproc=2 lcks=no
> 	mode 3   93.02 ns/loop nproc=1 lcks=yes
> 	mode 4  160.82 ns/loop nproc=2 lcks=yes
> 
>     With and without lock prefix, one and two processes, with
>     other global memory operations (note that the lock prefix instructions
>     have absorbed the other memory ops)
> 
> 	mode 5   37.64 ns/loop nproc=1 lcks=no
> 	mode 6   89.28 ns/loop nproc=2 lcks=no
> 	mode 7   88.32 ns/loop nproc=1 lcks=yes
> 	mode 8  161.08 ns/loop nproc=2 lcks=yes
> 
>     My conclusion from this is that the lock protocols have a general case
>     overhead of 50 to 80 nS on a duel P-III/450 system.  I don't think it
>     would be noticeable.

Just as another data point, it would be interesting to see the overhead
for non-inline versions (i.e. functions in the kernel which are using lock
or not called by code in loaded modules).

The alpha versions of these operations are already non-inline since it
takes quite a few instructions to implement them.

--
Doug Rabson				Mail:  dfr@nlsystems.com
Nonlinear Systems Ltd.			Phone: +44 181 442 9037




To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.9907122259540.58023-100000>