All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
	Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@gmail.com>,
	Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	rientjes@google.com, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] slub: reduce overhead of slub_debug
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2011 11:54:11 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E1600D3.8050105@candelatech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1107071341120.21719@router.home>

On 07/07/2011 11:42 AM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2011, Ben Greear wrote:
>
>> The more painful you make it, the less likely folks are to use it
>> in environments that actually reproduce bugs, so I think it's quite
>> short-sighted to reject such performance improvements out of hand.
>>
>> And what if some production machine has funny crashes in a specific
>> work-load....wouldn't it be nice if it could enable debugging and
>> still perform well enough to do it's job?
>
> Sure if there would be significant improvements that accomplish what
> you claim above then that would be certainly worthwhile. Come up with
> patches like that please.

The patch appears to make some work loads twice as fast ('make clean'),
and it had a reasonable speedup to the 'make -j12'.  What do you
consider 'significant'?

I'm willing to do some other network-related benchmarks with his patch if
that would give it better chance of being accepted.  (I end up running
with SLUB debug quite a bit on big, heavy, workloads...so any speedup
in that would be a big help for us...)

Thanks,
Ben

-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
	Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@gmail.com>,
	Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	rientjes@google.com, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] slub: reduce overhead of slub_debug
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2011 11:54:11 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E1600D3.8050105@candelatech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1107071341120.21719@router.home>

On 07/07/2011 11:42 AM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2011, Ben Greear wrote:
>
>> The more painful you make it, the less likely folks are to use it
>> in environments that actually reproduce bugs, so I think it's quite
>> short-sighted to reject such performance improvements out of hand.
>>
>> And what if some production machine has funny crashes in a specific
>> work-load....wouldn't it be nice if it could enable debugging and
>> still perform well enough to do it's job?
>
> Sure if there would be significant improvements that accomplish what
> you claim above then that would be certainly worthwhile. Come up with
> patches like that please.

The patch appears to make some work loads twice as fast ('make clean'),
and it had a reasonable speedup to the 'make -j12'.  What do you
consider 'significant'?

I'm willing to do some other network-related benchmarks with his patch if
that would give it better chance of being accepted.  (I end up running
with SLUB debug quite a bit on big, heavy, workloads...so any speedup
in that would be a big help for us...)

Thanks,
Ben

-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2011-07-07 18:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-06-26 19:39 [PATCH] slub: reduce overhead of slub_debug Marcin Slusarz
2011-06-26 19:39 ` Marcin Slusarz
2011-06-28 19:32 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-06-28 19:32   ` Christoph Lameter
2011-06-28 19:40   ` David Daney
2011-06-28 19:40     ` David Daney
2011-06-28 20:58     ` David Rientjes
2011-06-28 20:58       ` David Rientjes
2011-06-28 21:04       ` Ben Greear
2011-06-28 21:04         ` Ben Greear
2011-06-28 21:10         ` David Rientjes
2011-06-28 21:10           ` David Rientjes
2011-06-28 21:16       ` Dave Jones
2011-06-28 21:16         ` Dave Jones
2011-07-07 18:07 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-07-07 18:07   ` Pekka Enberg
2011-07-07 18:17   ` Christoph Lameter
2011-07-07 18:17     ` Christoph Lameter
2011-07-07 18:30     ` Ben Greear
2011-07-07 18:30       ` Ben Greear
2011-07-07 18:42       ` Christoph Lameter
2011-07-07 18:42         ` Christoph Lameter
2011-07-07 18:54         ` Ben Greear [this message]
2011-07-07 18:54           ` Ben Greear
2011-07-07 18:30     ` Matt Mackall
2011-07-07 18:30       ` Matt Mackall
2011-07-07 18:52     ` Pekka Enberg
2011-07-07 18:52       ` Pekka Enberg
2011-07-07 18:55       ` Matt Mackall
2011-07-07 18:55         ` Matt Mackall
2011-07-07 19:12       ` Christoph Lameter
2011-07-07 19:12         ` Christoph Lameter
2011-07-07 19:21         ` David Miller
2011-07-07 19:21           ` David Miller
2011-07-07 19:49           ` Pekka Enberg
2011-07-07 19:49             ` Pekka Enberg
2011-07-07 20:12             ` Christoph Lameter
2011-07-07 20:12               ` Christoph Lameter
2011-07-08  5:23               ` Andi Kleen
2011-07-08  5:23                 ` Andi Kleen
2011-07-08 17:41                 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-07-08 17:41                   ` Christoph Lameter
2011-07-08  5:38               ` Pekka Enberg
2011-07-08  5:38                 ` Pekka Enberg

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=4E1600D3.8050105@candelatech.com \
    --to=greearb@candelatech.com \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=marcin.slusarz@gmail.com \
    --cc=mpm@selenic.com \
    --cc=penberg@kernel.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.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.