Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "1192ms".
Did you mean:
112ms
2014 Jun 11
0
[PATCH v11 06/16] qspinlock: prolong the stay in the pending bit path
...I said before, I did see a difference with that change. I think it
depends on the CPU chip that we used for testing. I ran my test on a
10-core Westmere-EX chip. I run my microbench on different pairs of core
within the same chip. It produces different results that varies from
779.5ms to up to 1192ms. Without that patch, the lowest value I can get
is still close to 800ms, but the highest can be up to 1800ms or so. So I
believe it is just a matter of timing that you did not observed in your
test machine.
-Longman
2014 Jun 11
2
[PATCH v11 06/16] qspinlock: prolong the stay in the pending bit path
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 11:43:52AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> ---
> kernel/locking/qspinlock.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++--
> 1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
> index fc7fd8c..7f10758 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
> @@ -233,11 +233,25
2014 Jun 11
2
[PATCH v11 06/16] qspinlock: prolong the stay in the pending bit path
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 11:43:52AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> ---
> kernel/locking/qspinlock.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++--
> 1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
> index fc7fd8c..7f10758 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
> @@ -233,11 +233,25