All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: xuehai zhang <hai@cs.uchicago.edu>
To: "Petersson, Mats" <mats.petersson@amd.com>
Cc: Kate Keahey <keahey@mcs.anl.gov>,
	Xen Mailing List <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
	Tim Freeman <tfreeman@mcs.anl.gov>
Subject: Re: open/stat64 syscalls run faster on Xen VM than standard Linux
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 09:50:43 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <438B2753.4020401@cs.uchicago.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <907625E08839C4409CE5768403633E0B0EAAC4@sefsexmb1.amd.com>

Mats,

I mounted the loopback file in dom0, chrooted to the mountpoint and redid the experiment. The 
results is attached below. The time of open and stat64 calls is similar to the XenLinux case and 
also much smaller than the standard Linux case. So, either using loopback file as backend of 
XenLinux or directly mounting it in local filesystem will result in some benefit (maybe just caused 
by the extra layer of block caching) for the performance of some system calls.

# strace -c /bin/sh -c /bin/echo foo

% time     seconds  usecs/call     calls    errors syscall
------ ----------- ----------- --------- --------- ----------------
  21.93    0.000490         490         1           write
  16.34    0.000365          24        15           old_mmap
  15.26    0.000341          38         9         3 open
   9.62    0.000215          43         5           read
   7.97    0.000178          10        18           brk
   7.79    0.000174          87         2           munmap
   4.07    0.000091           8        11           rt_sigaction
   3.27    0.000073          12         6           close
   2.91    0.000065          11         6           fstat64
   2.28    0.000051           9         6           rt_sigprocmask
   2.15    0.000048          24         2           access
   1.75    0.000039          13         3           uname
   1.66    0.000037          19         2           stat64
   0.40    0.000009           9         1           getpgrp
   0.40    0.000009           9         1           getuid32
   0.36    0.000008           8         1           time
   0.36    0.000008           8         1           getppid
   0.36    0.000008           8         1           getgid32
   0.31    0.000007           7         1           getpid
   0.27    0.000006           6         1           execve
   0.27    0.000006           6         1           geteuid32
   0.27    0.000006           6         1           getegid32
------ ----------- ----------- --------- --------- ----------------
100.00    0.002234                    95         3 total

Thanks.

Xuehai


Petersson, Mats wrote:
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com 
>>[mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com] On Behalf Of 
>>Anthony Liguori
>>Sent: 28 November 2005 14:39
>>To: xuehai zhang
>>Cc: Xen Mailing List
>>Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] open/stat64 syscalls run faster on 
>>Xen VM than standard Linux
>>
>>This may just be the difference between having the extra 
>>level of block caching from using a loop back device.
>>
>>Try running the same benchmark on a domain that uses an 
>>actual partition.  While the syscalls may appear to be 
>>faster, I imagine it's because the cost of pulling in a block 
>>has already been payed so the overall workload is unaffected.
> 
> 
> And this would be the same as running standard linux with the loopback
> file-system mounted and chroot to the local file-system, or would that
> be different? [I'm asking because I don't actually understand enough
> about how it works to know what difference it makes, and I would like to
> know, because at some point I'll probably need to know this.]
> 
> --
> Mats
> 
>>Regards,
>>
>>Anthony Liguori
>>
>>xuehai zhang wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
> 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2005-11-28 15:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-11-28 14:45 open/stat64 syscalls run faster on Xen VM than standard Linux Petersson, Mats
2005-11-28 15:28 ` xuehai zhang
2005-11-28 15:50 ` xuehai zhang [this message]
2005-11-28 16:07   ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2005-11-28 16:27     ` xuehai zhang
2005-11-28 17:10       ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2005-11-29  4:50         ` Tim Freeman
2005-11-29 13:27         ` xuehai zhang
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-11-29 12:59 Petersson, Mats
2005-11-29 13:48 ` xuehai zhang
2005-11-28 18:17 Petersson, Mats
2005-11-28 16:15 Petersson, Mats
2005-11-28 17:16 ` xuehai zhang
2005-11-28 19:37   ` Anthony Liguori
2005-11-28 14:36 Petersson, Mats
2005-11-28 14:47 ` xuehai zhang
2005-11-28  8:21 xuehai zhang
2005-11-28 14:38 ` Anthony Liguori
2005-11-28 14:59   ` xuehai zhang
2005-11-29 12:39   ` xuehai zhang
2005-11-29 12:58     ` xuehai zhang

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=438B2753.4020401@cs.uchicago.edu \
    --to=hai@cs.uchicago.edu \
    --cc=keahey@mcs.anl.gov \
    --cc=mats.petersson@amd.com \
    --cc=tfreeman@mcs.anl.gov \
    --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.