From: shobhit dayal <shobhit@calsoftinc.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Performance of del_single_shot_timer_sync
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 15:59:36 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1097404176.11717.510.camel@kuber> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041008101949.49cda1a8.akpm@osdl.org>
On Fri, 2004-10-08 at 22:49, Andrew Morton wrote:
> shobhit dayal <shobhit@calsoftinc.com> wrote:
> >
> > del_timer_sync was responsible for about 2% of all remote memory
> > accesses on the system and came up as part of the top 10 functions who
> > were doing this. On top was schedule(7.52%) followed by
> > default_wake_function(2.79%). Rest every one in the top 10 were
> > around the range of 2%.
> >
> > After the patch it never came up in the logs again( so less than 0.5% of
> > all faulting eip's).
> >
>
> And what is the overall improvement from the del_timer_sync speedup patch?
> I mean: overall runtime and CPU time improvements for a
> relatively-real-world benchmark?
>
I have Geoff's figures
Before: 32p 4p
Warm cache 29,000 505
Cold cache 37,800 1220
After: 32p 4p
Warm cache 95 88
Cold cache 1,800 140
[Measurements are CPU cycles spent in a call to del_timer_sync, the average
of 1000 calls. 32p is 16-node NUMA, 4p is SMP.]
These figures, would apply for the case for where del_timer_sync does get called from del_single_shot_timer_sync.
That is del_singe_shot_timer_sync gets called after timer has expired
For my profiling workload i used the standard pg_regress module from the postgres installation and noticed that
the ratio of calls to del_single_shot_timer_sync after expiry to before expiry was 10:1. over 11000 calls to
del_single_shot_timer_sync.
regards
shobhit
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-10 10:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-08 13:37 [RFC] [PATCH] Performance of del_single_shot_timer_sync shobhit dayal
2004-10-08 17:19 ` Andrew Morton
2004-10-10 10:29 ` shobhit dayal [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-10-04 7:24 shobhit dayal
2004-10-04 8:41 ` Andrew Morton
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=1097404176.11717.510.camel@kuber \
--to=shobhit@calsoftinc.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.