lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Sep]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements
On Thu, Sep 10 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 10 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 14:20 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > >
> > > > One thing I also noticed is that when I have logged in, I run xmodmap
> > > > manually to load some keymappings (I always tell myself to add this to
> > > > the log in scripts, but I suspend/resume this laptop for weeks at the
> > > > time and forget before the next boot). With the stock kernel, xmodmap
> > > > will halt X updates and take forever to run. With BFS, it returned
> > > > instantly. As I would expect.
> > >
> > > Can you provide a little more detail (I'm a xmodmap n00b), how
> > > does one run xmodmap and maybe provide your xmodmap config?
> >
> > Will do, let me get the notebook and strace time it on both bfs
> > and mainline.
>
> A 'perf stat' comparison would be nice as well - that will show us
> events strace doesnt show, and shows us the basic scheduler behavior
> as well.
>
> A 'full' trace could be done as well via trace-cmd.c (attached), if
> you enable:
>
> CONFIG_CONTEXT_SWITCH_TRACER=y
>
> and did something like:
>
> trace-cmd -s xmodmap ... > trace.txt

trace.txt attached. Steven, you seem to go through a lot of trouble to
find the debugfs path, yet at the very end do:

> system("cat /debug/tracing/trace");

which doesn't seem quite right :-)

--
Jens Axboe



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-09-10 11:47    [W:1.439 / U:0.012 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site