From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup (New Benchmarks)
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 09:27:31 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3A5B3BF3.485A6375@candelatech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3A578F27.D2A9DF52@candelatech.com> <20010107042959.A14330@gruyere.muc.suse.de> <3A580B31.7998C783@candelatech.com> <20010107062744.A15198@gruyere.muc.suse.de> <3A58249F.86DD52BC@candelatech.com> <3A597665.4B68C39@candelatech.com> <200101080700.XAA10037@pizda.ninka.net> <3A59EA1F.AEAD08A6@candelatech.com> <20010108175036.A22154@fred.local>
Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 04:23:41PM +0100, Ben Greear wrote:
> > I don't argue that ifconfig shouldn't be fixed, but the hash speeds up
>
> It's already fixed since months. There was one stupid algorithm, which
> I was to blame for when I changed ifconfig to use a device list two years ago.
The benchmark was run against this one:
[root@candle lanforge]# ifconfig --version
net-tools 1.57
ifconfig 1.40 (2000-05-21)
The latest I could find anywhere.... Please tell me the version of a
newer one if it exists.
> > ip by about 2X too. Is that not useful enough? ip seems to be implemented
> > pretty efficient, so if the hash helps it significantly then maybe it
> > can help other efficient programs too. Notice that it is the system
> > (ie kernel) time that stays remarkably flat with the hash + ip graph.
>
> Just does your benchmark represent anything that real users do frequently ?
I'm going to write something that binds to a raw device, which is something
users (DHCP, for sure) does. If it does not show any significant improvement,
then I'll drop the issue untill many-many interfaces are more common.
>
> If you really want to optimize I'm sure there are lots of areas in the kernel
> where your efforts are better spent ;) [just run with a the kernel profiler on
> for a few days on your box and look at all the real hot spots]
I was just trying to smooth VLAN's adoption into the kernel by removing the
one linear-lookup that I know of relating to lots of VLANs. It obviously
isn't horribly important, but it was fun :)
>
> BTW, if you just want to optimize ip link ls speed it would be probably enough
> to keep a one behind cache that just caches the next member after the last
> search.
That is still linear in the kernel...or do you mean cache in the kernel? At any
rate, I'm more concerned about random access.
>
> -Andi
--
Ben Greear (greearb@candelatech.com) http://www.candelatech.com
Author of ScryMUD: scry.wanfear.com 4444 (Released under GPL)
http://scry.wanfear.com http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-01-09 15:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 77+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-01-06 21:33 [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!) Ben Greear
2001-01-06 23:17 ` David S. Miller
2001-01-07 4:06 ` Ben Greear
2001-01-07 5:36 ` David S. Miller
2001-01-07 13:42 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission Alan Cox
2001-01-07 15:33 ` Matti Aarnio
2001-01-07 16:46 ` Alan Cox
2001-01-07 17:32 ` Matti Aarnio
2001-01-07 19:02 ` Ben Greear
2001-01-07 18:06 ` Alan Cox
2001-01-07 18:53 ` Matti Aarnio
2001-01-07 19:30 ` Ben Greear
2001-01-07 18:30 ` Alan Cox
2001-01-07 22:40 ` 5116
2001-01-08 2:19 ` David Ford
2001-01-09 20:25 ` Christopher E. Brown
2001-01-10 2:47 ` Ben Greear
2001-01-07 18:21 ` jamal
2001-01-07 19:00 ` Matti Aarnio
2001-01-07 19:10 ` jamal
2001-01-07 19:24 ` Matti Aarnio
2001-01-08 0:21 ` jamal
2001-01-07 19:37 ` Ben Greear
2001-01-07 18:53 ` jamal
2001-01-07 3:29 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!) Chris Wedgwood
2001-01-07 5:40 ` David S. Miller
2001-01-07 6:15 ` Ben Greear
2001-01-07 10:22 ` David Ford
2001-01-07 12:13 ` Chris Wedgwood
2001-01-07 12:01 ` David S. Miller
2001-01-08 5:32 ` Andi Kleen
2001-01-08 6:12 ` Chris Wedgwood
2001-01-08 6:26 ` Andi Kleen
2001-01-08 6:57 ` David Ford
2001-01-08 13:08 ` jamal
2001-01-09 13:28 ` Blu3Viper
2001-01-08 6:13 ` Blu3Viper
2001-01-07 12:19 ` David Ford
2001-01-07 16:56 ` jamal
2001-01-07 17:37 ` Gleb Natapov
2001-01-07 18:02 ` routable interfaces WAS( " jamal
2001-01-07 19:21 ` routable interfaces WAS( Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup (DoesNOT " Ben Greear
2001-01-07 18:29 ` jamal
2001-01-07 18:51 ` Gleb Natapov
2001-01-07 19:05 ` jamal
2001-01-07 19:19 ` routable interfaces WAS( Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup(DoesNOT " Sandy Harris
2001-01-07 20:42 ` Ben Greear
2001-01-08 0:37 ` jamal
2001-01-08 5:25 ` routable interfaces WAS( Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup(DoesNOTmeet " Ben Greear
2001-01-08 13:05 ` jamal
2001-01-07 3:29 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet " Andi Kleen
2001-01-07 4:00 ` jamal
2001-01-07 4:06 ` Andi Kleen
2001-01-07 5:43 ` David S. Miller
2001-01-07 11:40 ` [little bit OT] ip _IS_ _NOT_ ifconfig and route ! (was Re: [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!)) Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2001-01-07 11:50 ` David S. Miller
2001-01-07 13:47 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission Alan Cox
2001-01-07 16:12 ` jamal
2001-01-07 16:51 ` Alan Cox
2001-01-07 15:56 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!) jamal
2001-01-07 16:30 ` Gleb Natapov
2001-01-07 16:36 ` jamal
2001-01-07 19:54 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumissionpolicy!) Ben Greear
2001-01-07 6:24 ` Ben Greear
2001-01-07 5:29 ` Andi Kleen
2001-01-07 6:22 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!) Ben Greear
2001-01-07 5:27 ` Andi Kleen
2001-01-07 8:11 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission policy!) (Benchmarks) Ben Greear
2001-01-07 7:15 ` Andi Kleen
2001-01-08 8:12 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (New Benchmarks) Ben Greear
2001-01-08 7:00 ` David S. Miller
2001-01-08 16:26 ` Ben Greear
2001-01-08 16:50 ` Andi Kleen
2001-01-09 16:27 ` Ben Greear [this message]
2001-01-07 13:50 ` [PATCH] hashed device lookup (Does NOT meet Linus' sumission Alan Cox
2001-01-07 16:44 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2001-01-07 19:09 ` Ben Greear
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=3A5B3BF3.485A6375@candelatech.com \
--to=greearb@candelatech.com \
--cc=ak@muc.de \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox