[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090811150057.GY7176@balbir.in.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 20:30:57 +0530
From: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
"nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp" <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
"menage@...gle.com" <menage@...gle.com>, andi.kleen@...el.com,
Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
"lizf@...fujitsu.com" <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: Help Resource Counters Scale better (v4)
* Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com> [2009-08-11 10:54:50]:
>
>
> Balbir Singh wrote:
>> Enhancement: Remove the overhead of root based resource counter accounting
>>
>>
>>
>
> <snip>
>> Please test/review.
>>
>>
> FWIW ...
>
Thanks for the testing!
> On a 64p/32G system running 2.6.31-git2-rc5, with RESOURCE_COUNTERS off,
> "time make -j64" results in
>
> real 4m54.972s
> user 90m13.456s
> sys 50m19.711s
>
> On the same system, running 2.6.31-git2-rc5, with RESOURCE_COUNTERS on,
> plus Balbir's "Help Resource Counters Scale Better (v3)" patch, and this
^^^
you mean (v4) right?
> patch, results in
>
> real 4m18.607s
> user 84m58.943s
> sys 50m52.682s
>
Without the patch and RESOURCE_COUNTERS do you see a big overhead. I'd
assume so, I am seeing it on my 24 way box that I have access to.
--
Balbir
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists