From: Hanna Linder <hannal@us.ibm.com>
To: insecure@mail.od.ua, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
Cc: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Hanna Linder <hannal@us.ibm.com>,
lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Minutes from 10/1 LSE Call
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2003 15:45:13 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <73350000.1065134713@w-hlinder> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200310030138.34430.insecure@mail.od.ua>
Ahh. I see the confusion. These are excerpts from two different speakers.
Notice the line of ===== separating speakers in the minutes.
This part is from Steve Pratt's mm vs mainline comparisons:
> On Thursday 02 October 2003 22:10, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> insecure wrote:
>> > That sounds reasonable, but today's RAM throughput is on the order
>> > of 1GB/s, not 100Mb/s. 'Out of L1' theory can't explain 100Mb/s ceiling
>> > it seems.
>>
>> cp(1) data, at least, will never ever be in L1. Copying data you need
>> to look at the ends of the pipeline -- hard drive throughput, PCI bus
>> bandwidth, FSB bandwidth, speed at which ext2/3 allocates blocks, and
>> similar things are likely bottlenecks.
>
> Hmm.
>
This part is from Mark Gross's Real Time Application issues discussion:
> On Wednesday 01 October 2003 22:19, Hanna Linder wrote:
>> We got about 100 mb/sec using the bonie benchmark for block io writes,
>> for writes we hit a ceiling around 100-120 mb/sec. Stopped scaling
>> after about 3 spindles.
>>
>> Tried to focus on the block io part of it. Have not tried
>> direct or raw io yet. With block IO we got about 133 mb/sec
>> doing a simple dd to dev/null from multiple spindles. This
>> was on the 2.6 test 3.
>> ....
>> Odirect on large block sizes has low cpu utilization ( 3-5% ).
>> However with buffered IO we can easily get to 100% cpu utilization.
>> If you look at the profile most of that is in the copy_to_user function.
>
> So:
> * we hit a ceiling of ~133 Mb/s, no matter how many disks
> * CPU utilization is 100%, spent mostly in copy_to_user
> * RAM bandwidth is >1Gb/s
Hanna
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-10-02 22:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-10-01 19:19 Minutes from 10/1 LSE Call Hanna Linder
2003-10-01 23:29 ` Andrew Morton
2003-10-01 23:38 ` Larry McVoy
2003-10-02 0:23 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-10-02 18:56 ` insecure
2003-10-02 19:10 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-10-02 22:38 ` insecure
2003-10-02 22:45 ` Hanna Linder [this message]
2003-10-05 5:38 ` Andrew Morton
2003-10-02 19:21 ` [Lse-tech] " Steven Pratt
2003-10-02 19:36 ` Andrew Morton
2003-10-03 19:33 ` Steven Pratt
2003-10-03 20:13 ` Andrew Morton
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=73350000.1065134713@w-hlinder \
--to=hannal@us.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=insecure@mail.od.ua \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lm@bitmover.com \
--cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
/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