public inbox for fortran@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Zhu, Lipeng" <lipeng.zhu@intel.com>
To: Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de>,
	"fortran@gcc.gnu.org" <fortran@gcc.gnu.org>,
	"gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Cc: "Lu, Hongjiu" <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>,
	"Li, Tianyou" <tianyou.li@intel.com>,
	"Deng, Pan" <pan.deng@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] libgfortran: Replace mutex with rwlock
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2022 11:46:16 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <PH7PR11MB6056276756F4F4ABEBC35DA69FF29@PH7PR11MB6056.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1051672f-91ff-f9f8-50e8-c44df16b2bd8@netcologne.de>

> 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 
> > instances, we can get the unit in the phase of reading the unit_cache 
> > or unit_root tree. So split the read/write phase by rwlock would be an 
> > approach to make it more parallel.
>
> No comment on the code itself, as yet... but I'd like to know how throroughly you tested it, using which tools, and on which programs.
> Did you use valgrind --tool=helgrind or --tool=drd?  Since it is prone to race conditions, did you also test Fortran's asynchronous I/O?
>
> Best regards
>
>	Thomas

Hi Thomas,

I didn’t use valgrind and make check-fortran succeed in local. 
And the tools/programs I used is pts/neatbench https://openbenchmarking.org/test/pts/neatbench

Best Regards,
Lipeng Zhu



  reply	other threads:[~2022-12-28 11:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <CAMe9rOoU3ooV5+UoB69WgE8NipeJSWHe52x=-H=a4cSSTaR_Xw () mail ! gmail ! com>
2022-12-30  0:16 ` Lipeng Zhu
2022-12-28  9:24   ` Thomas Koenig
2022-12-28 11:46     ` Zhu, Lipeng [this message]
2023-01-05  9:17       ` Zhu, Lipeng

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=PH7PR11MB6056276756F4F4ABEBC35DA69FF29@PH7PR11MB6056.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=lipeng.zhu@intel.com \
    --cc=fortran@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=hongjiu.lu@intel.com \
    --cc=pan.deng@intel.com \
    --cc=tianyou.li@intel.com \
    --cc=tkoenig@netcologne.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).