mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nauman Tahir <nauman.tahir@gmail.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: kernelnewbies@nl.kernel.org
Subject: X86_64 and X86_32 bit performance difference [Revisited]
Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 22:29:00 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f0309ff0601082229u3fc5e415m12be9dc921f4a099@mail.gmail.com> (raw)

Hello All
I have posted this problem before. Now mailing again after testing as
recommeded in previous replys.
My configuration is:

Hardware:
HP Proliant DL145 (2 x AMD Optaron 144)
14 GB RAM

OS:
FC 4

Kernel
2.6.xx

As suggested by some friend, I compiled same kermel with maximum
possible common configuration options both on 32 and 64 bit. Tested my
deriver and got the same result.
Let me explain in detail whats going on.
I have a block device driver which uses my RAMDISK for caching the
data for some Target disk.
I have implemented two simple caching policies in it. I am running
IOTEST to see the IO rate of my driver. My RAMDISK differs for 32 and
64 bit versions. 32 bit version uses kmap family to read/write data
to/from memory while 64 bit version uses __va function call to get the
virtual address directly to avoid ioremap which sleeps and slows down
the IO rate considerably.RAMDISK individually gives very high IO rate
with IOTEST but perormance with my driver gets about one fourth. This
only happens when I run the whole thing on X86_64 bit compiled kernel.
Things works well on 32 bit version. Driver for both versions is same.
I can also not figure out what kernel configuration option is making
the difference if there is any.

My code does not seems to have portablility issues. Like calculations
are based on unsigned long. There are few threads involved based on
kernel_thread as used in MD driver.

Any ideas whats is the cause of performance difference? what areas to
look for ??

Nauman

             reply	other threads:[~2006-01-09  6:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-01-09  6:29 Nauman Tahir [this message]
2006-01-09  7:51 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-01-10 10:49   ` Nauman Tahir
2006-01-10 10:53     ` Nauman Tahir
2006-01-10 21:14     ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-01-09 18:27 ` Andi Kleen
2006-01-10 10:50   ` Nauman Tahir

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=f0309ff0601082229u3fc5e415m12be9dc921f4a099@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=nauman.tahir@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernelnewbies@nl.kernel.org \
    --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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®