mxnet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From kellen sunderland <kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Futex
Date Fri, 24 Nov 2017 05:59:47 GMT
I think Haitao is right given some stacks we've recently looked at.  e.g.
https://gist.github.com/KellenSunderland/893d11165e19d1efcf5c0fe8e8584600

-Kellen

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 7:32 PM, Haitao Wang <haitao@openailab.com> wrote:

> Hi, Chris,
>
> As far as I know, the mutex implementation in Linux is based on futex
> already.
>
> Thanks,
> Haitao
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev-return-1553-haitao=openailab.com@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> [mailto:dev-return-1553-haitao=openailab.com@mxnet.incubator.apache.org]
> On Behalf Of Chris Olivier
> Sent: Friday, November 24, 2017 3:02 AM
> To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Futex
>
> Was doing some timing with futexes (we used them a lot in a previous life
> in database engines) and they're consistently about 20-30% faster than
> standard mutexes in Linux.
>
> However, it seems like this is not worth making a change since mutexes
> don't tend to get called so much that it would seem to make a noticeable
> difference, although I could be wrong -- so far besides the queue, I am not
> aware of any major bottlenecks on mutexes.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> -Chris
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message