public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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/

  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