From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Oct  8 19:11:02 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 125D61065765;
	Wed,  8 Oct 2008 19:11:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org)
Received: from server.baldwin.cx (bigknife-pt.tunnel.tserv9.chi1.ipv6.he.net
	[IPv6:2001:470:1f10:75::2])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC2A98FC20;
	Wed,  8 Oct 2008 19:10:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org)
Received: from localhost.corp.yahoo.com (john@localhost [IPv6:::1])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by server.baldwin.cx (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m98JAd6H057756;
	Wed, 8 Oct 2008 15:10:51 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org)
From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To: =?gb2312?q?=C7=F1=BD=A3?= <qj@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2008 11:16:10 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7
References: <000a01c9291a$b81fa560$01000001@china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <000a01c9291a$b81fa560$01000001@china.huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200810081116.10298.jhb@freebsd.org>
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by
	milter-greylist-2.0.2 (server.baldwin.cx [IPv6:::1]);
	Wed, 08 Oct 2008 15:10:51 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.93.1/8395/Wed Oct 8 12:44:51 2008 on
	server.baldwin.cx
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=4.2 tests=BAYES_00, DATE_IN_PAST_03_06, 
	NO_RELAYS autolearn=ham version=3.1.3
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on server.baldwin.cx
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org,
	freebsd-threads@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: kernel profiling: spinlock_exit consumes 36% CPU time.
X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD <freebsd-threads.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-threads>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-threads@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>,
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2008 19:11:02 -0000

On Wednesday 08 October 2008 03:51:48 am =C7=F1=BD=A3 wrote:
> Many thanks for the information.
>=20
> Could we say that interrupt handlers consumed ~36% execution time?
>=20
> Is this number too high? Is it possible that we abuse the use of critical
> sections in kernel?

I think whether or not it is high depends on the workload.

=2D-=20
John Baldwin