On 2023/12/14 20:39, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 01:29:01PM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>>> Sure, I will look into that.
>>>
>>> BTW, I didn’t have the PowerPC in hands, do you mind granting the access of
>>> your
>>> test environment to me to help reproduce the issue?
>>
>>
On 2023/12/14 4:52, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Hi Lipeng!
>
> On 2023-12-12T02:05:26+0000, "Zhu, Lipeng" wrote:
> > On 2023/12/12 1:45, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> On Sat, Dec 9, 2023 at 7:25 PM Zhu, Lipeng
> wrote:
> >> > On 2023/12/9 23:23, Jakub Jeli
On 2023/12/12 1:45, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 9, 2023 at 7:25 PM Zhu, Lipeng wrote:
> >
> > On 2023/12/9 23:23, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > > On Sat, Dec 09, 2023 at 10:39:45AM -0500, Lipeng Zhu wrote:
> > > > This patch try to introduce the rwlock and split
On 2023/12/9 23:23, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 09, 2023 at 10:39:45AM -0500, Lipeng Zhu wrote:
> > This patch try to introduce the rwlock and split the read/write to
> > unit_root tree and unit_cache with rwlock instead of the mutex to
> > increase CPU efficiency. In the get_gfc_unit functi
On 2023/12/8 18:19, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 11:18:19AM +0800, Zhu, Lipeng wrote:
> > From: Lipeng Zhu
> >
> > This patch try to introduce the rwlock and split the read/write to
> > unit_root tree and unit_cache with rwlock instead of the mutex to
> > [CCing Ian as libgcc maintainer]
> >
> > On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 10:14:37 +0000
> > "Zhu, Lipeng" wrote:
> >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Lipeng,
> > > > >
> > > > > >>> Sure, as your com
> [CCing Ian as libgcc maintainer]
>
> On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 10:14:37 +0000
> "Zhu, Lipeng" wrote:
>
> > > >
> > > > Hi Lipeng,
> > > >
> > > > >>> Sure, as your comments, in the patch V6, I added 3 test
> >
> > Hi Lipeng,
> >
> > >>> Sure, as your comments, in the patch V6, I added 3 test cases with
> > >>> OpenMP to test different cases in concurrency respectively:
> > >>> 1. find and create unit very frequently to stress read lock and write
> > >>> lock.
> > >>> 2. only access the unit which ex
>
> Hi Lipeng,
>
> >>> Sure, as your comments, in the patch V6, I added 3 test cases with
> >>> OpenMP to test different cases in concurrency respectively:
> >>> 1. find and create unit very frequently to stress read lock and write
> >>> lock.
> >>> 2. only access the unit which exist in cache t
>
> > Hi Thomas,
> >
> > >
> > > Hi Lipeng,
> > >
> > > > May I know any comment or concern on this patch, thanks for your
> > > > time
> > > > 😄
> > >
> > > Thanks for your patience in getting this reviewed.
> > >
> > > A few remarks / questions.
> > >
> > > Which strategy is used in this impleme
> Hi Thomas,
>
> >
> > Hi Lipeng,
> >
> > > May I know any comment or concern on this patch, thanks for your
> > > time
> > > 😄
> >
> > Thanks for your patience in getting this reviewed.
> >
> > A few remarks / questions.
> >
> > Which strategy is used in this implementation, read-preferring or
>
ix typos and code formatter.
v5 -> v6:
Add unit tests.
Reviewed-by: Hongjiu Lu
Reviewed-by: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
Reviewed-by: Thomas Koenig
Signed-off-by: Zhu, Lipeng
---
libgcc/gthr-posix.h | 60 +++
libgfortran/io/async.c|
Hi Thomas,
>
> Hi Lipeng,
>
> > May I know any comment or concern on this patch, thanks for your time
> > 😄
>
> Thanks for your patience in getting this reviewed.
>
> A few remarks / questions.
>
> Which strategy is used in this implementation, read-preferring or write-
> preferring? And if
On 1/1/1970 8:00 AM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
Hi Lipeng,
May I know any comment or concern on this patch, thanks for your time :)
Thanks for your patience in getting this reviewed.
A few remarks / questions.
Which strategy is used in this implementation, read-preferring or
write-preferring
On 5/16/2023 3:08 PM, Zhu, Lipeng wrote:
On 5/9/2023 10:32 AM, Zhu, Lipeng wrote:
On 1/1/1970 8:00 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
On Mon, 8 May 2023 17:44:43 +0800
Lipeng Zhu wrote:
This patch try to introduce the rwlock and split the read/write to
unit_root tree and unit_cache
On 5/9/2023 10:32 AM, Zhu, Lipeng wrote:
On 1/1/1970 8:00 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
On Mon, 8 May 2023 17:44:43 +0800
Lipeng Zhu wrote:
This patch try to introduce the rwlock and split the read/write to
unit_root tree and unit_cache with rwlock instead of the mutex to
On 1/1/1970 8:00 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
On Mon, 8 May 2023 17:44:43 +0800
Lipeng Zhu wrote:
This patch try to introduce the rwlock and split the read/write to
unit_root tree and unit_cache with rwlock instead of the mutex to
increase CPU efficiency. In the get_gfc_unit functio
On 1/1/1970 8:00 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
Hi!
[please do not top-post]
Sure, thanks for the reminder.
On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 21:13:08 +0800
"Zhu, Lipeng" wrote:
Hi Bernhard,
Thanks for your questions and suggestions.
The rwlock could allow multiple threads to have
rt, while write part is not always necessary or
most unlikely once the unit hit in cache;
3. We try to balance the implementation complexity and the performance
gains that fit into current cases we observed.
"
Best Regards,
Zhu, Lipeng
On 1/1/1970 8:00 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
On 19
> > Hi Lipeng,
> >
> > > This patch try to introduce the rwlock and split the read/write to
> > > unit_root tree and unit_cache with rwlock instead of the mutex to
> > > increase CPU efficiency. In the get_gfc_unit function, the
> > > percentage to step into the insert_unit function is around 3
> Hi Lipeng,
> > This patch try to introduce the rwlock and split the read/write to
> > unit_root tree and unit_cache with rwlock instead of the mutex to
> > increase CPU efficiency. In the get_gfc_unit function, the percentage
> > to step into the insert_unit function is around 30%, in most
>
> libstdc++ implements shared mutex with pthread_rwlock, which can
> libstdc++ conflict
> with the pthread_rwlock usage in libgcc. Lipeng, please limit the
> pthread_rwlock usage in libgcc only when __cplusplus isn't defined.
>
>
> --
> H.J.
Thanks for suggestion, send a V2 patch.
--
Lipeng
22 matches
Mail list logo
