On Tue, 26 Nov 2013, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 12:21:40PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > I'm somewhat reluctant to chalk it up to a single mfence - maybe
> > timings/behavior changed in some substantial way?
>
> Ah indeed! We also changed the case where an enqueueing futex sees the
> uval change and bails. It is now far more expensive due to having to
> both queue and unqueue, whereas before it wouldn't queue at all.
>
> I suppose the idea was to offset that by not requiring locking on the
> wake side.
Aside of that I really would be interrested in an explanation for the
STDDEV going up by factor 5. That's a clear indicator for fishyness.
Thanks,
tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
