Re: [PATCH 0/6] Per-processor private data areas for i386

From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Date: Wed Sep 27 2006 - 16:28:23 EST

Pavel Machek wrote:
So we have 4% slowdown...

Yes, that would be the worst-case slowdown in the hot-cache case. Rearranging the layout of the GDT would remove any theoretical cold-cache slowdown (I haven't measured if there's any impact in practice).

...and 0.2% smaller kernel. I guess you should demonstrate speedup at
complex syscalls before wedecide it is worth it...

That would be nice, but this patch series isn't really intended to be a performance improvement. That would be nice, but the main motivation is to make inline assembler patching for the paravirt work cleaner.

Rusty and I have also been investigating how to use the %gs-based memory to implement all percpu data, rather than the few special cases this patch series currently covers, which will help further amortize the entry/exit cost.

Rusty has also done more comprehensive benchmarks with his variant of this patch series, and found no statistically interesting performance difference. Which is pretty much what I would expect, since it doesn't increase cache-misses at all.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at