Hi Alex, sorry for the delay and thanks for taking care of this. I couldn't experience any noticeable performance drop.
Acked-by: Daniele Di Proietto <diproiet...@vmware.com> On 22/08/2015 16:44, "Alex Wang" <al...@nicira.com> wrote: >Sorry for the delay of pushing this and related dpdk patches, > >Want to spend some time next week measuring the performance impact,~ > >Thanks, >Alex Wang, > >On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 11:48:49AM -0700, Alex Wang wrote: >> > For performance-critical threads like pmd threads, we currently make >>them >> > never call coverage_clear() to avoid contention over the global mutex >> > 'coverage_mutex'. So, even though pmd thread still keeps updating >>their >> > thread-local coverage count, the count is never attributed to the >>global >> > total. But it is useful to have them available. >> > >> > This commit makes this happen by implementing a non-contending version >> > of the clear function, coverage_try_clear(). The function will use >> > the ovs_mutex_trylock() and return immediately if the mutex cannot >> > be acquired. Since threads like pmd thread are always busy-looping, >> > the lock will eventually be acquired. >> > >> > Requested-by: Ilya Maximets <i.maxim...@samsung.com> >> > Signed-off-by: Alex Wang <al...@nicira.com> >> >> This seems like an improvement. I can imagine better data structures >> but I don't know whether they're worthwhile. >> >> Acked-by: Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> >> >_______________________________________________ >dev mailing list >dev@openvswitch.org >https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__openvswitch.org_mailma >n_listinfo_dev&d=BQIGaQ&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-YihVMNtXt-uEs&r=Sm >B5nZacmXNq0gKCC1s_Cw5yUNjxgD4v5kJqZ2uWLlE&m=eyhC-yvVbYX9Ldi_S7D-WQlI0gxgpN >Z2f7CNpONhdHQ&s=u-Il0-gm4T7RRfs9WlDo_6TRlF2zgHBDAjBYt_IV6VM&e= _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
