[RFC][gdbsupport] Improve thread scheduling in parallel_for_each
Tom Tromey
tom@tromey.com
Fri Jul 15 19:05:48 GMT 2022
>>>>> "Tom" == Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org> writes:
Tom> This introduces a performance regression on a particular test-case I happened
Tom> to use:
Tom> ...
Tom> $ for n in $(seq 1 10); do \
Tom> time gdb -q -batch libxul.so.debug 2>&1 | grep real:; \
Tom> done
Tom> ...
Tom> so revert to the original schedule by reducing the worker threads:
Tom> ...
This seems like making a change and then undoing it somewhere else?
Tom> Still, the performance experiment yields a slight performance loss.
Sounds bad.
Tom> if (n_threads < 0)
Tom> - n_threads = std::thread::hardware_concurrency ();
Tom> + {
Tom> + n_threads = std::thread::hardware_concurrency ();
Tom> + if (n_threads > 0)
Tom> + /* Account for main thread. */
Tom> + n_threads--;
Tom> + }
I think it's better if the setting just directly controls how many
threads there are. Then elsewhere we can decide what that means -- like
if it performs better with the defaults to not do any work in the main
thread, then parallel_for_each can be modified to just send tasks to the
workers and do nothing in the main thread except wait for results.
Tom> size_t elts_per_thread = 0;
[...]
Tom> + elts_per_thread = n_elements / n_threads;
The initial declaration can be removed and then this latter line can
declare the variable as well.
Tom> for (int i = 0; i < count; ++i)
Tom> {
Tom> RandomIt end = first + elts_per_thread;
Tom> + if (i < left_over)
Tom> + end++;
It may be nice to mention the distribution of leftovers in a comment
somewhere.
Tom
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list