Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932325AbWI3ABS (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Sep 2006 20:01:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932333AbWI3ABS (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Sep 2006 20:01:18 -0400 Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.152]:11747 "EHLO e34.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932325AbWI3ABR (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Sep 2006 20:01:17 -0400 Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] [RFC][PATCH 02/10] Task watchers v2 Benchmark From: Matt Helsley To: Paul Jackson Cc: sekharan@us.ibm.com, jtk@us.ibm.com, jes@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-audit@redhat.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, sgrubb@redhat.com, hch@lst.de In-Reply-To: <20060929131350.ef1bd156.pj@sgi.com> References: <20060929020232.756637000@us.ibm.com> <20060929021300.034805000@us.ibm.com> <20060928193243.c6766a2a.pj@sgi.com> <1159558733.3286.64.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060929131350.ef1bd156.pj@sgi.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: IBM Linux Technology Center Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 17:01:13 -0700 Message-Id: <1159574473.3286.83.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1425 Lines: 33 On Fri, 2006-09-29 at 13:13 -0700, Paul Jackson wrote: > Matt wrote: > > Heh, sorry about that. I do have some initial kernbench numbers. > > Thanks. You mention that one of the patches, Benchmark, reduced > time spent in user space. I guess that means that patch hurt > something ... though I'm confused ... wouldn't these patches risk > spending more time in system space, not less in user space? I would have thought so too, but it also appears to consistently reduce time spent in the kernel. This seems to imply that the performance improves for the first task watcher that gets added. I'd randomly guess there's a branch misprediction when no watchers are registered. My latest results will be more rigorous in that they show what a pure 2.6.18-mm1 run looks like. I've also removed the benchmark patch from the series of runs. Unfortunately it takes approximately 24 hours to run so it'll be a little while before I have the numbers. > Do you have any analysis of the other runs? Just looking at raw > numbers, when it's not a benchmark I've used recently, kinda fuzzes > over my feeble brain. Nope, sorry. I'll see what I can put together. Cheers, -Matt Helsley - 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/