All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>
To: habanero@us.ibm.com
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
Subject: Re: 46% performance drop with change in glibc
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 14:37:57 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <436923A5.2060102@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200511021310.51926.habanero@us.ibm.com>

Hi Andrew,

My immediate guess would be TLS emulation.

Do you not disable TLS on FC4?

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

Andrew Theurer wrote:

>I have been trying to track down a xen performance regression from Fedora 
>core3 to core4 i386 and I think I might have narrowed it down.  First some 
>background info:  I ran the SDET benchmark [1] and discovered that we have 
>about a 45% regression after upgrading to Fedora core 4.  I noticed 
>xenoprofile showed ~20% in error_code on FC4, but only ~3.5% in error_code 
>(should we even have 3%?!?) on FC3.  At first I thought the change to gcc-4 
>might have something to do with it, so I tried gcc4 on FC3 -no regression.  
>I noticed glibc was also different, so I upgraded FC3 from 2.3.3 to 2.3.5 
>-bingo.  I am not sure what about glibc is causing this, but here are the 
>two profiles:
>
>fc3 with glic-2.3.3:
>
>samples  %        app name                 symbol name
>56097    22.8770  cc1                      (no symbols)
>22780     9.2900  troff                    (no symbols)
>8646      3.5259  xen-unstable-syms        error_code
>7822      3.1899  grotty                   (no symbols)
>5283      2.1545  libc-2.3.3.so            _int_malloc
>4914      2.0040  vmlinux-2.6.12-xen0-up   buffered_rmqueue
>4453      1.8160  bash                     (no symbols)
>4372      1.7830  xen-unstable-syms        get_page_from_l1e
>3492      1.4241  xen-unstable-syms        put_page_from_l1e
>3338      1.3613  vmlinux-2.6.12-xen0-up   system_call
>3040      1.2397  xen-unstable-syms        hypercall
>2801      1.1423  xen-unstable-syms        alloc_page_type
>2799      1.1415  vmlinux-2.6.12-xen0-up   zap_pte_range
>2798      1.1411  libstdc++.so.6.0.3       (no symbols)
>2761      1.1260  libc-2.3.3.so            vfprintf
>2637      1.0754  vmlinux-2.6.12-xen0-up   do_no_page
>2555      1.0420  libc-2.3.3.so            __i686.get_pc_thunk.bx
>2548      1.0391  vmlinux-2.6.12-xen0-up   page_fault
>
>fc3 with glibc-2.3.5:
>
>samples  %        app name                 symbol name
>133404   22.7469  xen-unstable-syms        error_code
>31411     5.3559  libc-2.3.5.so            malloc
>30316     5.1692  troff                    (no symbols)
>20632     3.5180  libc-2.3.5.so            vfprintf
>16626     2.8349  xen-unstable-syms        gpf_emulate_4gb
>10639     1.8141  xen-unstable-syms        do_general_protection
>10105     1.7230  grotty                   (no symbols)
>9837      1.6773  libc-2.3.5.so            getwchar
>8057      1.3738  xen-unstable-syms        decode_register
>7347      1.2527  libc-2.3.5.so            iswgraph
>7114      1.2130  vmlinux-2.6.12-xen0-up   buffered_rmqueue
>6926      1.1810  cc1                      is_attribute_p
>6679      1.1388  libc-2.3.5.so            _int_malloc
>6350      1.0827  xen-unstable-syms        fixup_seg
>5673      0.9673  xen-unstable-syms        get_baselimit
>5039      0.8592  bash                     (no symbols)
>4957      0.8452  xen-unstable-syms        get_page_from_l1e
>4908      0.8369  xen-unstable-syms        put_page_from_l1e
>4576      0.7803  ld-2.3.5.so              do_lookup_x
>4322      0.7370  xen-unstable-syms        hypercall
>3915      0.6676  vmlinux-2.6.12-xen0-up   system_call
>
>I assume something related to gpf_emulate_4gb...
>Anyone have an idea why this would cause such a regression?
>
>-Andrew
>
>
>[1] SDET described here:
>http://www.spec.org/osg/sdm91/
>
>_______________________________________________
>Xen-devel mailing list
>Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
>http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>
>  
>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2005-11-02 20:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-11-02 19:10 46% performance drop with change in glibc Andrew Theurer
2005-11-02 19:17 ` Kip Macy
2005-11-02 19:23   ` Andrew Theurer
2005-11-02 20:14     ` Andrew Theurer
2005-11-02 21:31       ` Ulrich Drepper
2005-11-02 20:37 ` Anthony Liguori [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-11-04 16:08 Ian Pratt
2005-11-07 21:09 ` Andrew Theurer
2005-11-07 21:26 Ian Pratt
2005-11-08 13:05 ` Andrew Theurer
2005-11-08 13:17 Ian Pratt
2005-11-08 14:57 ` Andrew Theurer
2005-11-08 16:53   ` Ulrich Drepper
2005-11-08 19:30   ` Kurt Garloff
2005-11-09  2:02 ` Jeremy Katz

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=436923A5.2060102@us.ibm.com \
    --to=aliguori@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=habanero@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
    /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.