mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@engr.sgi.com>
To: Brent Casavant <bcasavan@sgi.com>
Cc: Albert Cahalan <albert@users.sourceforge.net>,
	Andrew Morton OSDL <akpm@osdl.org>,
	linux-kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	ak@suse.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add kallsyms_lookup() result cache
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 16:10:17 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200406221610.17077.jbarnes@engr.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SGI.4.58.0406221426580.27967@kzerza.americas.sgi.com>

On Tuesday, June 22, 2004 3:45 pm, Brent Casavant wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Jun 2004, Albert Cahalan wrote:
> > I'm not so sure anything needs to be fixed, save for SGI upgrading
> > to a more modern procps. There are many more important things:
>
> OK, I looked into this more closely, and gave procps 3.2.1 a spin.
> This gives us a similar speedup (top now only consumes 60% of a CPU)
> to that which I obtained by cacheing symbol lookups and using an old
> procps.  This difference is certainly explainable by top now only
> obtaining wchan information for displayed processes.
>
> 60% is far better than 800%, so this is certainly progress.  However
> 60% is also still quite a bit of CPU time.  I'll spend some cycles
> trying to whittle it down some more, but I'm not all that hopeful.

Is the 60% mainly kernel or user time now?  There were some good ideas in this 
thread that we could use to speed up symbol table searching.  And if opening 
and reading /proc/kallsyms is taking a significant portion of the time, we 
could probably trim it down too by only reading it once and polling for 
module insertion/removal.

Jesse

  reply	other threads:[~2004-06-22 20:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-06-19  0:43 Albert Cahalan
2004-06-19  4:51 ` Herbert Xu
2004-06-19 12:03   ` Albert Cahalan
2004-06-19 10:06 ` Andrew Morton
2004-06-19 13:05   ` Albert Cahalan
2004-06-22 19:45     ` Brent Casavant
2004-06-22 20:10       ` Jesse Barnes [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-06-18 20:03 Brent Casavant
2004-06-18 20:37 ` Martin Josefsson
2004-06-18 20:55   ` Brent Casavant
2004-06-18 22:03 ` Andi Kleen
2004-06-18 23:26   ` Jesse Barnes
2004-06-18 23:56     ` Andi Kleen
2004-06-19  0:16       ` Jesse Barnes
2004-06-18 23:31   ` Brent Casavant
2004-06-18 23:59     ` Andi Kleen

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=200406221610.17077.jbarnes@engr.sgi.com \
    --to=jbarnes@engr.sgi.com \
    --cc=ak@suse.de \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=albert@users.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=bcasavan@sgi.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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

Powered by JetHome