Re: 2.5.38-mm3

[Dipankar Sarma]

On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 02:20:20AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 01:57:43PM +0530, Dipankar Sarma wrote:
> > What application were you all running ?
> > Thanks
> 
> Basically, the workload on my "desktop" system consists of numerous ssh
> sessions in and out of the machine, half a dozen IRC clients, xmms,
> Mozilla, and X overhead.

Ok, from a relatively idle system (4CPU) running SMP kernel -

    18 fget                                       0.2250
0           0.00        c013d460:       push   %ebx
0           0.00        c013d461:       mov    $0xffffe000,%edx
0           0.00        c013d466:       mov    %eax,%ecx
0           0.00        c013d468:       and    %esp,%edx
0           0.00        c013d46a:       mov    (%edx),%eax
1           5.56        c013d46c:       mov    0x674(%eax),%ebx
1           5.56        c013d472:       lea    0x4(%ebx),%eax
0           0.00        c013d475:       lock subl $0x1,(%eax)
3          16.67        c013d479:       js     c013d61b <.text.lock.file_table+0x30>
0           0.00        c013d47f:       mov    (%edx),%eax
1           5.56        c013d481:       mov    0x674(%eax),%edx
0           0.00        c013d487:       xor    %eax,%eax
0           0.00        c013d489:       cmp    0x8(%edx),%ecx
0           0.00        c013d48c:       jae    c013d494 <fget+0x34>
0           0.00        c013d48e:       mov    0x14(%edx),%eax
0           0.00        c013d491:       mov    (%eax,%ecx,4),%eax
0           0.00        c013d494:       test   %eax,%eax
0           0.00        c013d496:       je     c013d49c <fget+0x3c>
0           0.00        c013d498:       lock incl 0x14(%eax)
0           0.00        c013d49c:       lock incl 0x4(%ebx)
5          27.78        c013d4a0:       pop    %ebx
0           0.00        c013d4a1:       ret
7          38.89        c013d4a2:       lea    0x0(%esi,1),%esi

I tried an SMP kernel on 1 CPU -

    15 fget                                       0.1875
0           0.00        c013d460:       push   %ebx
2          13.33        c013d461:       mov    $0xffffe000,%edx
0           0.00        c013d466:       mov    %eax,%ecx
0           0.00        c013d468:       and    %esp,%edx
0           0.00        c013d46a:       mov    (%edx),%eax
0           0.00        c013d46c:       mov    0x674(%eax),%ebx
0           0.00        c013d472:       lea    0x4(%ebx),%eax
0           0.00        c013d475:       lock subl $0x1,(%eax)
3          20.00        c013d479:       js     c013d61b <.text.lock.file_table+0x30>
0           0.00        c013d47f:       mov    (%edx),%eax
0           0.00        c013d481:       mov    0x674(%eax),%edx
0           0.00        c013d487:       xor    %eax,%eax
0           0.00        c013d489:       cmp    0x8(%edx),%ecx
0           0.00        c013d48c:       jae    c013d494 <fget+0x34>
0           0.00        c013d48e:       mov    0x14(%edx),%eax
0           0.00        c013d491:       mov    (%eax,%ecx,4),%eax
0           0.00        c013d494:       test   %eax,%eax
0           0.00        c013d496:       je     c013d49c <fget+0x3c>
0           0.00        c013d498:       lock incl 0x14(%eax)
0           0.00        c013d49c:       lock incl 0x4(%ebx)
4          26.67        c013d4a0:       pop    %ebx
0           0.00        c013d4a1:       ret    
6          40.00        c013d4a2:       lea    0x0(%esi,1),%esi

The counts are off by one.

With a UP kernel, I see that fget() cost is negligible.
So it is most likely the atomic operations for rwlock acquisition/release
in fget() that is adding to its cost. Unless of course my sampling
is too less.

Please try running the files_struct_rcu patch where fget() is lockfree
and let me know what you see.

Thanks
-- 
Dipankar Sarma  <[e-mail]> http://lse.sourceforge.net
Linux Technology Center, IBM Software Lab, Bangalore, India.