[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1910171122030.1824@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2019 11:24:45 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Dmitry Safonov <dima@...sta.com>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@...il.com>,
Adrian Reber <adrian@...as.de>,
Andrei Vagin <avagin@...nvz.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...tuozzo.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, criu@...nvz.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
Andrei Vagin <avagin@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv7 00/33] kernel: Introduce Time Namespace
On Fri, 11 Oct 2019, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
> We wrote two small benchmarks. The first one gettime_perf.c calls
> clock_gettime() in a loop for 3 seconds. It shows us performance with
> a hot CPU cache (more clock_gettime() cycles - the better):
>
> | before | CONFIG_TIME_NS=n | host | inside timens
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> | 153242367 | 153567617 | 150933203 | 139310914
> | 153324800 | 153115132 | 150919828 | 139299761
> | 153125401 | 153686868 | 150930471 | 139273917
> | 153399355 | 153694866 | 151083410 | 139286081
> | 153489417 | 153739716 | 150997262 | 139146403
> | 153494270 | 153724332 | 150035651 | 138835612
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> avg | 153345935 | 153588088 | 150816637 | 139192114
> diff % | 100 | 100.1 | 98.3 | 90.7
That host 98.3% number is weird and does not match the tests I did with the
fallback code I provided you. On my limited testing that fallback hidden in
the slowpath did not show any difference to the TIME_NS=n case when not
inside a time namespace.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists