linux-kernel - Benchmarks of kernel tracing options 2 (ftrace, lttng and perf)

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <1290029498.4ce449ba1679d@www.imp.polymtl.ca>
Date:	Wed, 17 Nov 2010 16:31:38 -0500
From:	Douglas Santos <douglas.santos@...ymtl.ca>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	ltt-dev@...ts.casi.polymtl.ca, David Sharp <dhsharp@...gle.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Michael Rubin <mrubin@...gle.com>
Subject: Benchmarks of kernel tracing options 2 (ftrace, lttng and perf)

Hi all,

This is a response to a benchmark, submitted a few weeks ago, comparing kernel
tracing options.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/10/28/422

We followed the methodology described in the link bellow,
but using the shellscripts posted there to reproduce autotest scripts.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/10/28/261

We disabled the extra syscall tracing on lttng, for a fair comparison.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/10/28/290

Average results with tracing "on":

lttng:  220 ns
ftrace: 260 ns
perf:   740 ns

E5405 system
kernel 2.6.36

-lttng 0.239 + 0.19.2modules + sys_getuid tracepoint + sys_getuid probe
 + remove syscall_trace

-ftrace and perf + sys_getuid tracepoint

--
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/