public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Shailabh Nagar <nagar@watson.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Subject: Re: [Patch 0/9] Performance
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 18:38:08 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060325023808.GB6416@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4422BBD9.40901@watson.ibm.com>

On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 10:16:41AM -0500, Shailabh Nagar wrote:
> Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 07:40:34PM -0500, Shailabh Nagar wrote:
> >
> >>This is the next iteration of the delay accounting patches
> >>last posted at
> >>	http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0602.3/0893.html
> >
> >
> > Do you have any benchmark numbers with this patch applied and with it
> > not applied?  Last I heard it was a measurable decrease for some
> > "important" benchmark results...
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > greg k-h
> 
> Here are some numbers for the latest set of posted patches
> using microbenchmarks hackbench, kernbench and lmbench.
> 
> I was trying to get the real/big benchmark numbers too but
> it looks like getting a run whose numbers can be trusted
> will take a bit longer than expected. Preliminary runs of
> transaction processing benchmarks indicate that overhead
> actually decreases with the patch (as also seen in some of
> the lmbench numbers below).

That's good to hear.

But your .5% is noticable on the +patch results, which I don't think
people who take performance issues seriously will like (that's real
money for the big vendors.)  And distros will be forced to enable that
option in their kernels, so those vendors will have to get that
percentage back some other way...

thanks,

greg k-h

  reply	other threads:[~2006-03-25  2:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-03-14  0:40 [Patch 0/9] Per-task delay accounting Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-14  0:42 ` [Patch 1/9] timestamp diff Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-14  1:01   ` Lee Revell
2006-03-14  1:05     ` Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-14  1:12       ` Lee Revell
2006-03-14  3:42         ` Balbir Singh
2006-03-14  4:26           ` Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-14  6:50             ` Balbir Singh
2006-03-15 10:23   ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-03-15 10:28     ` Balbir Singh
2006-03-14  0:45 ` Patch 2/9] Initialization Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-14 10:54   ` Jes Sorensen
2006-03-14 15:20     ` Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-15 10:24   ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-03-15 12:37     ` Alan Cox
2006-03-15 15:53       ` Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-14  0:47 ` [Patch 3/9] Block I/O accounting initialization Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-15 10:27   ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-03-15 16:27     ` Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-14  0:48 ` [Patch 4/9] Block I/O accounting collection Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-14  0:51 ` [Patch 5/9] Swapin delays Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-14  0:53 ` [Patch 7/9] /proc interface for all I/O delays Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-14  0:55 ` [Patch 8/9] generic netlink utility functions Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-26 16:44   ` Balbir Singh
2006-03-26 17:06     ` jamal
2006-03-14  0:56 ` [Patch 9/9] Generic netlink interface for delay accounting Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-14  2:29   ` jamal
2006-03-14  2:33   ` Matt Helsley
2006-03-14  2:48     ` jamal
2006-03-14  4:18       ` Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-22  7:49       ` [RFC][UPDATED PATCH 2.6.16] " Balbir Singh
2006-03-23 14:04         ` jamal
2006-03-23 15:41           ` Balbir Singh
2006-03-24 14:04             ` jamal
2006-03-24 14:54               ` Balbir Singh
2006-03-25  1:19                 ` jamal
2006-03-25  9:41                   ` Balbir Singh
2006-03-25 12:52                     ` jamal
2006-03-25 15:36                       ` Balbir Singh
2006-03-25 17:48                         ` jamal
2006-03-25 18:22                           ` Balbir Singh
2006-03-26 14:05                             ` jamal
2006-03-26 16:40                               ` Balbir Singh
2006-03-24  1:32           ` Balbir Singh
2006-03-24 14:11             ` jamal
2006-03-24 14:19               ` jamal
2006-03-24 14:59               ` Balbir Singh
2006-03-14  4:29     ` Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-14  1:01 ` [Patch 6/9] cpu delay collection Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-14 19:28 ` [Patch 0/9] Per-task delay accounting Greg KH
2006-03-14 20:49   ` Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-14 21:24     ` Greg KH
2006-03-14 21:59       ` Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-23 15:16   ` [Patch 0/9] Performance Shailabh Nagar
2006-03-25  2:38     ` Greg KH [this message]
2006-03-27 18:28       ` Shailabh Nagar

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=20060325023808.GB6416@kroah.com \
    --to=greg@kroah.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nagar@watson.ibm.com \
    --cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox