public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
Cc: tony.luck@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: ia64_do_page_fault shows 19.4% slowdown from notify_die.
Date: 19 Apr 2006 02:30:35 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <p73r73u2yqc.fsf@bragg.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060418221623.GB22514@lnx-holt.americas.sgi.com>

Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com> writes:
 
> 499 nSec/fault ia64_do_page_fault notify_die commented out.
> 501 nSec/fault ia64_do_page_fault with nobody registered.
> 533 nSec/fault notify_die in and just kprobes.
> 596 nSec/fault notify_die in and kdb, kprobes, mca, and xpc loaded.
> 
> The 596 nSec/fault is a 19.4% slowdown.  This is an upcoming OSD beta
> kernel.  It will be representative of what our typical customer will
> have loaded.

With kdb some slowdown is expected.

But just going through kprobes shouldn't be that slow. I guess
there would be optimization potential there.

Do you have finer grained profiling what is actually slow?

 
> Having the notify_page_fault() without anybody registered was only a
> 0.4% slowdown.  I am not sure that justifies the optimize away, but I
> would certainly not object.

Still sounds far too much for what is essentially a call + load + test + return
Where is that overhead comming from?  I know IA64 doesn't like indirect
calls, but there shouldn't any be there for this case.

-Andi
 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2006-04-19  0:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-04-13 19:46 Is notify_die being overloaded? Robin Holt
2006-04-15  6:19 ` Keith Owens
2006-04-15 10:43   ` Robin Holt
2006-04-17  7:52     ` Keith Owens
2006-04-17 10:51       ` Robin Holt
2006-04-17 11:25         ` Robin Holt
2006-04-18  0:23           ` Keith Owens
2006-04-18 22:16             ` ia64_do_page_fault shows 19.4% slowdown from notify_die Robin Holt
2006-04-18 23:03               ` Keshavamurthy Anil S
2006-04-19  0:30               ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2006-04-19 11:11                 ` Robin Holt
2006-04-17 16:50       ` Is notify_die being overloaded? Keshavamurthy Anil S
2006-04-17 16:45 ` Keshavamurthy Anil S
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-04-18 23:40 ia64_do_page_fault shows 19.4% slowdown from notify_die Luck, Tony

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=p73r73u2yqc.fsf@bragg.suse.de \
    --to=ak@suse.de \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=holt@sgi.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox