From: buhr@stat.wisc.edu (Kevin Buhr)
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>,
Serge Orlov <sorlov@con.mcst.ru>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jakob Østergaard <jakob@unthought.net>
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4.2 fails to merge mmap areas, 700% slowdown.
Date: 22 Mar 2001 12:23:15 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <vbaelvp3bos.fsf@mozart.stat.wisc.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.31.0103201042360.1990-100000@penguin.transmeta.com> <vba1yrr7w9v.fsf@mozart.stat.wisc.edu> <15032.1585.623431.370770@pizda.ninka.net> <vbay9ty50zi.fsf@mozart.stat.wisc.edu>
In-Reply-To: buhr@cs.wisc.edu's message of "21 Mar 2001 14:19:13 -0600"
buhr@cs.wisc.edu (Kevin Buhr) writes:
>
> "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> writes:
> >
> > It is the garbage collector scheme used for memory allocation in gcc
> > >=2.96 that triggers the bad cases seen by Serge.
>
> Ahhh! Thanks for the info.
>
> I'm still happy to help test out the patch, but I guess it's not
> likely to affect my 2.95.2 numbers much at all. Maybe I can get a
> snapshot of GCC 3.0 up and running, though, and test that out.
I pulled the "gcc-3_0-branch" of GCC from CVS and compiled Mozilla
under a 2.4.2 kernel. The numbers I saw were:
real 57m26.850s
user 96m57.490s
sys 3m16.780s
which are almost exactly the same as my GCC 2.95.2 numbers. When I
peeked at "/proc/<cc1plus>/maps" a few times, I counted ~150 lines,
not ~2000. On another, much smaller block of C++ code, I get similar
results: no dramatic change in kernel time.
Either the Mozilla codebase and my other test case don't tickle the
problem, or something has changed in 3.0's allocation scheme since
RedHat 2.96 was built.
Kevin <buhr@stat.wisc.edu>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-03-22 18:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-03-20 18:28 Linux 2.4.2 fails to merge mmap areas, 700% slowdown Serge Orlov
2001-03-20 18:43 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-03-20 18:59 ` Jakob Østergaard
2001-03-21 1:20 ` Kevin Buhr
2001-03-21 1:38 ` David S. Miller
2001-03-21 20:19 ` Kevin Buhr
2001-03-22 18:23 ` Kevin Buhr [this message]
2001-03-22 18:35 ` Jakob Østergaard
2001-03-23 4:32 ` Kevin Buhr
2001-03-24 4:11 ` Zack Weinberg
2001-03-24 21:46 ` Kevin Buhr
2001-03-24 5:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-03-24 9:31 ` Jakob Østergaard
2001-03-24 9:48 ` Jakob Østergaard
2001-03-24 19:54 ` Kevin Buhr
2001-03-25 3:17 ` Jakob Østergaard
2001-03-25 16:47 ` Jamie Lokier
[not found] ` <200103240502.VAA02673@penguin.transmeta.com>
2001-03-24 21:22 ` Kevin Buhr
2001-03-25 3:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-03-26 4:22 ` Kevin Buhr
2001-03-23 20:43 ` James Lewis Nance
2001-03-21 6:41 ` Mike Galbraith
2001-03-21 14:56 ` Matthias Urlichs
2001-03-21 15:05 ` Mike Galbraith
2001-03-21 15:59 ` Kurt Garloff
2001-03-21 16:45 ` Mike Galbraith
2001-03-21 20:16 ` Kevin Buhr
2001-03-22 9:04 ` Mike Galbraith
2001-03-22 22:19 ` Kevin Buhr
2001-03-23 7:44 ` Mike Galbraith
2001-03-23 21:36 ` 2.4.2-ac20 patch for process time double-counting (was: Linux 2.4.2 fails to merge mmap areas, 700% slowdown.) Kevin Buhr
2001-03-24 7:49 ` Mike Galbraith
2001-03-24 19:27 ` Kevin Buhr
2001-03-20 18:43 ` Linux 2.4.2 fails to merge mmap areas, 700% slowdown Jakob Østergaard
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-03-21 2:02 Dieter Nützel
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=vbaelvp3bos.fsf@mozart.stat.wisc.edu \
--to=buhr@stat.wisc.edu \
--cc=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=jakob@unthought.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sorlov@con.mcst.ru \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.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