lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Mar]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [patch 1/2] fork_connector: add a fork connector
From
Date
On Mon, 2005-03-28 at 13:42 -0800, Paul Jackson wrote:
> Guillaume wrote:
> > The lmbench shows that the overhead (the construction and the sending
> > of the message) in the fork() routine is around 7%.
>
> Thanks for including the numbers. The 7% seems a bit costly, for a bit
> more accounting information. Perhaps dean's suggestion, to not use
> ascii, will help. I hope so, though I doubt it will make a huge
> difference. Was this 7% loss with or without a user level program
> consuming the sent messages? I would think that the number of interest
> would include a minimal consumer task.

I ran some test using the CBUS instead of the cn_netlink_send() routine
and the overhead is nearly 0%:

fork connector disabled:
Process fork+exit: 148.1429 microseconds

fork connector enabled:
Process fork+exit: 148.4595 microseconds

Regards,
Guillaume

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-04-06 13:31    [W:0.107 / U:2.684 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site