From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 07:50:40 -0400
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Message-ID: <1b3bfeff9117336767b881178d1f8b6a@brasstown.quanstro.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAFgOgC9oeGtBp3mA2QRLfsgeziTxYjhwMBvFGuQjoYiCAHCDBQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <399b6c5c08b7aeab53f52ce0414714bf@brasstown.quanstro.net>
	<CAFgOgC9oeGtBp3mA2QRLfsgeziTxYjhwMBvFGuQjoYiCAHCDBQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] cache lines, and 60000 cycles of doom
Topicbox-Message-UUID: fc1e587e-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Fri Jun 20 01:04:20 EDT 2014, devon.odell@gmail.com wrote:

> Weird. I assume cycles is using rdtsc or rdtscp. Perhaps some of it is due
> to a combination of contention and rdtsc(p) being serializing instructions?
> On Jun 19, 2014 12:04 PM, "erik quanstrom" <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:

other than the code i posted, nobody else touching the Srb,
and it's bigger than a cacheline.

why would serialization cause a big issue?

- erik