| To: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Route cache performance under stress |
| From: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 11 Jun 2003 09:25:19 +0200 |
| Cc: | greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ralph+d@xxxxxxxxx, Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx, hadi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xerox@xxxxxxxxxx, sim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, fw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20030610.180120.71112140.davem@redhat.com> |
| References: | <20030610.152020.59678979.davem@redhat.com> <Pine.LNX.4.51.0306101956520.7801@ns.istop.com> <3EE67D2D.80608@candelatech.com> <20030610.180120.71112140.davem@redhat.com> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
> I have a strange feeling that Ralph's system isn't using > TSC and that's why it shows up so high on the profiles :-) > TSC do_gettimeofday() is REALLY cheap (TSC read plus a multiply which > x86 does in like 5 cycles). On a P4 rdtsc takes 90+ cycles (probably because it's flushing the complete pipeline). Of course it's still relatively fast if you run that at 3Ghz, but on slower P4s it may hurt. On Athlons/Hammers it is quite fast, but at least on Hammer it needs a pipeline flush again for accuracy (otherwise the CPU can speculate it around) One bigger cost is normally the rw lock or the two memory barriers for the seqlock (on 2.5). On a UP compiled kernel it should not be a problem though. -Andi |
| Previous by Date: | RE: Route cache performance under stress, Jamal Hadi |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [PATCH/RFC] IPV6: Remember Manage/OtherConfig flags, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, Andi Kleen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, Robert Olsson |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |