Ignore:
Timestamp:
Jan 30, 2018, 3:54:32 PM (8 years ago)
Author:
Thierry Delisle <tdelisle@…>
Branches:
ADT, aaron-thesis, arm-eh, ast-experimental, cleanup-dtors, deferred_resn, demangler, enum, forall-pointer-decay, jacob/cs343-translation, jenkins-sandbox, master, new-ast, new-ast-unique-expr, new-env, no_list, persistent-indexer, pthread-emulation, qualifiedEnum, resolv-new, with_gc
Children:
633a642
Parents:
f792cb8 (diff), 42be3c3 (diff)
Note: this is a merge changeset, the changes displayed below correspond to the merge itself.
Use the (diff) links above to see all the changes relative to each parent.
Message:

Merge branch 'master' of plg.uwaterloo.ca:software/cfa/cfa-cc

File:
1 moved

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed

  • doc/theses/thierry_delisle/text/results.tex

    rf792cb8 r7416d46a  
    3838
    3939\section{Micro Benchmarks}
    40 All benchmarks are run using the same harness to produce the results, seen as the \code{BENCH()} macro in the following examples. This macro uses the following logic to benchmark the code :
     40All benchmarks are run using the same harness to produce the results, seen as the \code{BENCH()} macro in the following examples. This macro uses the following logic to benchmark the code:
    4141\begin{pseudo}
    42 #define BENCH(run, result) //Param: What to run, variable containing result
    43         before = gettime();
    44         run;
    45         after  = gettime();
     42#define BENCH(run, result) \
     43        before = gettime(); \
     44        run; \
     45        after  = gettime(); \
    4646        result = (after - before) / N;
    4747\end{pseudo}
    … …  
    4949
    5050\subsection{Context-Switching}
    51 The first interesting benchmark is to measure how long context-switches take. The simplest approach to do this is to yield on a thread\footnote{Yielding causes the thread to context-switch to the scheduler and back, more precisely: from the \gls{uthread} to the \gls{kthread} then from the \gls{kthread} back to the same \gls{uthread} (or a different one in the general case).}, which executes a 2-step context switch. In order to make the comparison fair, coroutines also execute a 2-step context-switch by resuming another coroutine which does nothing but suspending in a tight loop, which is a resume/suspend cycle instead of a yield. Listing \ref{lst:ctx-switch} shows the code for coroutines and threads with the results in table \ref{tab:ctx-switch}. All omitted tests are functionally identical to one of these tests. The difference between coroutines and threads can be attributed to the cost of scheduling.
     51The first interesting benchmark is to measure how long context-switches take. The simplest approach to do this is to yield on a thread, which executes a 2-step context switch. Yielding causes the thread to context-switch to the scheduler and back, more precisely: from the \gls{uthread} to the \gls{kthread} then from the \gls{kthread} back to the same \gls{uthread} (or a different one in the general case). In order to make the comparison fair, coroutines also execute a 2-step context-switch by resuming another coroutine which does nothing but suspending in a tight loop, which is a resume/suspend cycle instead of a yield. Listing \ref{lst:ctx-switch} shows the code for coroutines and threads with the results in table \ref{tab:ctx-switch}. All omitted tests are functionally identical to one of these tests. The difference between coroutines and threads can be attributed to the cost of scheduling.
    5252\begin{figure}
    5353\begin{multicols}{2}
    … …  
    115115
    116116\subsection{Mutual-Exclusion}
    117 The next interesting benchmark is to measure the overhead to enter/leave a critical-section. For monitors, the simplest approach is to measure how long it takes to enter and leave a monitor routine. Listing \ref{lst:mutex} shows the code for \CFA. To put the results in context, the cost of entering a non-inline function and the cost of acquiring and releasing a pthread mutex lock is also measured. The results can be shown in table \ref{tab:mutex}.
     117The next interesting benchmark is to measure the overhead to enter/leave a critical-section. For monitors, the simplest approach is to measure how long it takes to enter and leave a monitor routine. Listing \ref{lst:mutex} shows the code for \CFA. To put the results in context, the cost of entering a non-inline function and the cost of acquiring and releasing a \code{pthread_mutex} lock is also measured. The results can be shown in table \ref{tab:mutex}.
    118118
    119119\begin{figure}
    … …  
    266266
    267267\subsection{Object Creation}
    268 Finally, the last benchmark measures the cost of creation for concurrent objects. Listing \ref{lst:creation} shows the code for pthreads and \CFA threads, with results shown in table \ref{tab:creation}. As with all other benchmarks, all omitted tests are functionally identical to one of these tests. The only note here is that the call stacks of \CFA coroutines are lazily created, therefore without priming the coroutine, the creation cost is very low.
    269 
    270 \begin{figure}
    271 \begin{center}
    272 pthread
     268Finally, the last benchmark measures the cost of creation for concurrent objects. Listing \ref{lst:creation} shows the code for \texttt{pthread}s and \CFA threads, with results shown in table \ref{tab:creation}. As with all other benchmarks, all omitted tests are functionally identical to one of these tests. The only note here is that the call stacks of \CFA coroutines are lazily created, therefore without priming the coroutine, the creation cost is very low.
     269
     270\begin{figure}
     271\begin{center}
     272\texttt{pthread}
    273273\begin{ccode}
    274274int main() {
    … …  
    307307\end{cfacode}
    308308\end{center}
    309 \begin{cfacode}[caption={Benchmark code for pthreads and \CFA to measure object creation},label={lst:creation}]
     309\begin{cfacode}[caption={Benchmark code for \texttt{pthread}s and \CFA to measure object creation},label={lst:creation}]
    310310\end{cfacode}
    311311\end{figure}
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.