RE: [Linux-ia64] Re: web page on O(1) scheduler

From: Boehm, Hans <hans_boehm_at_hp.com>
Date: 2003-05-24 03:48:19
Sorry about the typo and misnaming for the test program.  I attached the correct version that prints the right labels.

The results I posted did not use NPTL.  (Presumably OpenMP wasn't targeted at NPTL either.)  I don't think that NPTL has any bearing on the underlying issues that I mentioned, though path lengths are probably a bit shorter.  It should also handle contention substantially better, but that wasn't tested.

I did rerun the test case on a 900 MHz Itanium 2 machine with a more recent Debian installation with NPTL.  I get 200msecs (20nsecs/iter) with the custom lock, and 768 for pthreads.  (With static linking that decreases to 658 for pthreads.)  Pthreads (and/or some of the other infrastructure) is clearly getting better, but I don't think the difference will disappear.

I don't have a Xeon with NPTL handy.  On an old PPro, the results were 1133 and 4379 msecs for custom and NPTL respectively.

Hans

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arjan van de Ven [mailto:arjanv@redhat.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 1:31 AM
> To: Hans Boehm
> Cc: Arjan van de Ven; davidm@hpl.hp.com; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> linux-ia64@linuxia64.org
> Subject: Re: [Linux-ia64] Re: web page on O(1) scheduler
> 
> 
> On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 06:07:46PM -0700, Hans Boehm wrote:
> > case.
> > 
> > On a 1GHz Itanium 2 I get
> > 
> > Custom lock: 180 msecs
> > Custom lock: 1382 msecs
> > 
> > On a 2GHz Xeon, I get
> > 
> > Custom lock: 646 msecs
> > Custom lock: 1659 msecs
> 
> is the pthreads one with nptl ?
> 




Received on Fri May 23 10:48:37 2003

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:15 EST