From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755533AbZA1Vb5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jan 2009 16:31:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752007AbZA1Vbr (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jan 2009 16:31:47 -0500 Received: from mu-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.134.190]:50363 "EHLO mu-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751302AbZA1Vbp (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jan 2009 16:31:45 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=q+mWD/P9QVYmsX70O9UBxzBrCoXMa+3Tq2Zlrc7+6/HUIYD4it+/8BvOcXmaBc+QyZ iZ4TqfpC1TKVIxZYfGNxapk7l9U9CUjGqgUTv31H5Kfijs/SWj7DURcapUwiKjgWE1q1 BZgUNwLH5ShxAHNM5nAPOQv0XRNdmChcTdVaA= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8c5a844a0901230310h7aa1ec83h60817de2b36212d8@mail.gmail.com> References: <8c5a844a0901220851g1c21169al4452825564487b9a@mail.gmail.com> <8c5a844a0901221500m7af8ff45v169b6523ad9d7ad3@mail.gmail.com> <20090122231358.GA27033@elte.hu> <8c5a844a0901230310h7aa1ec83h60817de2b36212d8@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 23:31:43 +0200 Message-ID: <8c5a844a0901281331w4cea7ab2y305d5a1af96e313e@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.28 1/2] memory: improve find_vma From: Daniel Lowengrub To: Ingo Molnar Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Daniel Lowengrub wrote: > On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 1:13 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> * Daniel Lowengrub wrote: >> >>> Simple syscall: 0.7419 / 0.4244 microseconds >>> Simple read: 1.2071 / 0.7270 microseconds >> >>there must be a significant measurement mistake here: none of your patches >>affect the 'simple syscall' path, nor the sys_read() path. >> >> Ingo > I ran the tests again, this time I ran them twice on each system and > calculated the average, the differences between results on the same os > were very small - I guess this means that the results were accurate. > I also made sure that no other programs were running during the tests. > Here're the new results using the same format of > test : standard kernel / kernel after patch > > Simple syscall: 0.26080 / 0.24935 microseconds > Simple read: 0.42580 / 0.43080 microseconds > Simple write: 0.36695 / 0.34565 microseconds > Simple stat: 2.71205 / 2.37415 microseconds > Simple fstat: 0.74955 / 0.66450 microseconds > Simple open/close: 3.95465 / 3.35740 microseconds > Select on 10 fd's: 0.74590 / 0.79510 microseconds > Select on 100 fd's: 2.97720 / 3.03445 microseconds > Select on 250 fd's: 6.51940 / 6.58265 microseconds > Select on 500 fd's: 12.56530 / 12.63580 microseconds > Signal handler installation: 0.63005 / 0.65285 microseconds > Signal handler overhead: 2.30350 / 2.24475 microseconds > Protection fault: 0.41750 / 0.42705 microseconds > Pipe latency: 6.04580 / 5.61270 microseconds > AF_UNIX sock stream latency: 9.00595 / 8.65615 microseconds > Process fork+exit: 130.57580 / 122.26665 microseconds > Process fork+execve: 491.81820 / 460.79490 microseconds > Process fork+/bin/sh -c: 2173.16665 / 2088.50000 microseconds > File /home/daniel/tmp/XXX write bandwidth: 23814.50000 / 23298.50000 KB/sec > Pagefaults on /home/daniel/tmp/XXX: 1.22625 / 1.17470 microseconds > > "mappings > 0.5242880 6.91 / 7.11 > 1.0485760 12.00 / 10.42 > 2.0971520 20.00 / 17.50 > 4.1943040 36.00 / 33.00 > 8.3886080 70.50 / 61.00 > 16.7772160 121.00 / 114.50 > 33.5544320 237.50 / 217.50 > 67.1088640 472.50 / 427.50 > 134.2177280 947.00 / 846.00 > 268.4354560 1891.00 / 1694.00 > 536.8709120 3786.00 / 3362.00 > 1073.7418240 8252.00 / 7357.00 > > As you expected, now there isn't a significant difference in the syscalls. > The summery of the tests where 2.6.28D.1 is the kernel after the patch > and 2.6.28D is the standard kernel is: > > Processor, Processes - times in microseconds - smaller is better > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Host OS Mhz null null open slct sig sig fork exec sh > call I/O stat clos TCP inst hndl proc proc proc > --------- --------------- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- > localhost Linux 2.6.28D 1678 0.26 0.40 2.71 4.02 5.61 0.63 2.30 129. 494. 2172 > localhost Linux 2.6.28D 1678 0.26 0.40 2.71 3.89 5.61 0.63 2.31 131. 489. 2174 > localhost Linux 2.6.28D.1 1678 0.25 0.39 2.38 3.34 5.70 0.65 2.24 122. 457. 2083 > localhost Linux 2.6.28D.1 1678 0.25 0.39 2.37 3.37 5.68 0.65 2.25 122. 463. 2094 > > What do you think? Are there other tests you'd like me to run? > Daniel > Do you think that this patch is useful? Should I keep working on the idea? Thanks