[lkml]   [2003]   [Mar]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: percpu-2.5.63-bk5-1 (properly generated)
>> Still degraded: diffprofile:
>> 781 1.6% total
>> 346 1.0% default_idle
>> 217 10.1% __down
>> 79 12.0% __wake_up
>> 51 70.8% page_address
>> 32 66.7% kmap_atomic
>> 24 5.3% page_remove_rmap
>> 16 19.3% clear_page_tables
>> 14 4.6% release_pages
>> 13 33.3% path_release
>> 13 6.7% __copy_to_user_ll
>> 13 260.0% bad_range
>> 11 1.3% do_schedule
>> 10 15.6% pte_alloc_one
> The largest issue is probably idle time, which appears to have gone up
> enormously in absolute terms. I'll split the pieces out and see what
> happens. From this it looks like the indirection is a slowdown, but the
> cost in absolute terms is insignificant, as there aren't enough samples.
> There's no clear reason __down() should have become more expensive,
> nor __wake_up(). I'd really like an instruction-level profile. AFAICT
> node_nr_running is 100% harmless instruction-wise, unless the copy
> propagated a nonzero value (which would be a bug), and per_cpu
> runqueues are largely unknown, but would be accountable to schedule(),
> which is not particularly offensive wrt. additional cpu time.
> Some kind of dump of internal scheduler statistics to verify they've
> been faithfully preserved would help also. Instruction-level cpu and
> cache profiling would also be helpful. There may very well be an odd
> cache coloring conflict at work here. If it's too big to take on, I
> might need some kind of help or a pointer to a package so I don't have
> to crap all over userspace for the benchmark. I may also need a .config
> in order to reproduce the usual bullcrap like (#@%$ing) link order.

I think you'd be better off profiling the improvement you saw, and working
out where that comes from.

Failing that, if you can split it into 3 or 4 patches along the lines I
suggested earlier, I'll try benching each bit seperately for you.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.058 / U:0.020 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site