[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Extremely poor performance crunching random numbers under PIV-FC5

On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 05:06:28PM +0200, BankHacker wrote:
> I think this could be the reason for the slowdown in my case because
> symptoms match. My program is invoking 10 million system calls for the
> first random test and it happens only in the dynamic version. My CPU
> is an Intel Pentium IV.

You are not invoking 10 million system calls, just 10 million library
routines.  Now, rand() as well as random() are thread-safe routines,
so they need to use a lock to protect the seed (unlike say random_r ()).
On i?86, glibc inlines the lock code:
  14:   b9 01 00 00 00          mov    $0x1,%ecx
  19:   65 83 3d 0c 00 00 00    cmpl   $0x0,%gs:0xc
  20:   00
  21:   74 01                   je     24 <__random+0x24>
  23:   f0 0f b1 8b XX XX XX    lock cmpxchg %ecx,0xXXXXXXXX(%ebx)
  2a:   XX
  2b:   0f 85 8f 01 00 00       jne    1c0 <_L_mutex_lock_13>
and similarly for unlock.
%gs:0xc ought to be non-zero only when the first pthread_call in the program
has been made.
On PIV, atomic instructions are horribly expensive.
Either you have preloaded some library that called pthread_create,
or your CPU is unable to do the jump around lock prefix trick quickly.

I certainly don't see your testcase being slow on my AMD64, neither
for 64-bit nor 32-bit program.

First of all, try benchmarking random_r, then see under debugger
if %gs:0xc is 0 or not.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]