cvs commit: src/sys/i386/i386 pmap.c
julian at elischer.org
Tue Nov 9 18:02:19 GMT 2004
Robert Watson wrote:
>This change made a large difference, and eliminates the unexplained costs.
>Here's a revised table as compared to the above:
> sleep mutex crit section spin mutex new spin mutex
> UP SMP UP SMP UP SMP UP SMP
>PIII 21 81 83 81 112 141 95 141
>P4 39 260 120 119 274 342 132 231
>So it basically cut 140 cycles off the P4 UP spin lock, 15 off the PIII UP
>spin lock, and 110 cycles off the P4 SMP spin lock. The PIII SMP spin
>lock looks the same. Keep in mind that all of these measurements have a
>standard deviation of between 0 and 3 cycles, most in the 1 range. Also
>keep in mind that these are entirely uncontended measurements.
>Assuming that these changes are correct, and pass whatever tests people
>have in mind, this would be a very strong merge candidate for performance
>reasons. The difference is visible in packet send tests from user space
>as a percentage or two improvement on UP on my P4, although it's a litte
>hard to tell due to the noise.
Can you explain why a spin mutex is more expensive than a sleep mutex (I
assume this is uncontested)?
More information about the cvs-src