linux-kernel - Re: x264 benchmarks BFS vs CFS

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 18 Dec 2009 14:36:53 +0100
From:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Jason Garrett-Glaser <darkshikari@...il.com>,
	Kasper Sandberg <lkml@...anurb.dk>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	LKML Mailinglist <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: x264 benchmarks BFS vs CFS

On Fri, 2009-12-18 at 14:06 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Mike Galbraith <efault@....de> wrote:
> 
> > > I'm personally curious as to what kind of scheduler issues this results 
> > > in--I haven't done any BFS vs CFS tests with this option enabled yet.
> > 
> > I'll look for x264 source, and patch/piddle.
> 
> btw., would be nice to look at it via tools/perf/ as well:
> 
>   perf stat --repeat 3 ...
> 
> to see the basic hardware utilization (cycles/cache-misses, branch execution 
> rate, instructions, etc.) and the basic parallelism metrics, at a glance.
> 
> i suspect "perf stat -e L1-icache-loads -e L1-icache-load-misses" would give 
> us an even more detailed picture.

Almost virgin v2.6.32-10468-g020307d running 'medium'.

encoded 600 frames, 36.52 fps, 13003.54 kb/s

 Performance counter stats for './x264.sh 8' (3 runs):

   63742.218844  task-clock-msecs         #      3.870 CPUs    ( +-   0.016% )
          42593  context-switches         #      0.001 M/sec   ( +-   0.487% )
           3011  CPU-migrations           #      0.000 M/sec   ( +-   0.417% )
          12862  page-faults              #      0.000 M/sec   ( +-   0.004% )
   151734450892  cycles                   #   2380.439 M/sec   ( +-   1.947% )  (scaled from 71.44%)
   205642315207  instructions             #      1.355 IPC     ( +-   0.085% )  (scaled from 80.68%)
    16274905932  branches                 #    255.324 M/sec   ( +-   0.080% )  (scaled from 80.67%)
     1257135617  branch-misses            #      7.724 %       ( +-   0.255% )  (scaled from 80.06%)
     3116653323  cache-references         #     48.895 M/sec   ( +-   0.340% )  (scaled from 23.78%)
       50823973  cache-misses             #      0.797 M/sec   ( +-   1.400% )  (scaled from 23.76%)

   16.470164901  seconds time elapsed   ( +-   0.079% )

encoded 600 frames, 36.58 fps, 13003.54 kb/s

 Performance counter stats for './x264.sh 8' (3 runs):

   133692266953  L1-icache-loads            ( +-   0.027% )
      997371592  L1-icache-load-misses      ( +-   0.009% )

   16.407060367  seconds time elapsed   ( +-   0.036% )


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/