[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100201132309.GM13771@kernel.dk>
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 14:23:09 +0100
From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
To: Hitoshi Mitake <mitake@....info.waseda.ac.jp>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Tom Zanussi <tzanussi@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] perf lock: New subcommand "perf lock", for
analyzing lock statistics
On Sun, Jan 31 2010, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > I tested this on Core i7 965 + 3GB DRAM machine.
> > Test program is mainly "perf bench sched messaging".
> >
> > Could you tell me the detail of your test situation?
>
> I tried to run it on a 64 thread box, on a fio job that was driving 80
> disks. It was just a quick test, but after ~20 seconds it had not even
> gotten started yet, it was still stuck in setting up the jobs and
> traversing sysfs for finding disk stats, etc. I can try something
> lighter to see if it's the cpu count or the tough job that was making it
> spiral into (near) death.
A simple 'perf lock rec ls' exhibits the same symptoms. It's been
running for a minute or so now, no output. Even local network pings take
500-1000ms.
--
Jens Axboe
--
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