Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1611237 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Radu Rendec <rrendec@arista.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-03-28 19:30 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-03-31 19:10 +0200 |
| Articles | 5 — 3 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
Impact of CONFIG_PARAVIRT=y / mmap benchmark Radu Rendec <rrendec@arista.com> - 2017-03-28 19:30 +0200
Re: Impact of CONFIG_PARAVIRT=y / mmap benchmark Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> - 2017-03-29 18:00 +0200
Re: Impact of CONFIG_PARAVIRT=y / mmap benchmark Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2017-03-29 20:10 +0200
Re: Impact of CONFIG_PARAVIRT=y / mmap benchmark Radu Rendec <rrendec@arista.com> - 2017-03-31 12:10 +0200
Re: Impact of CONFIG_PARAVIRT=y / mmap benchmark Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> - 2017-03-31 19:10 +0200
| From | Radu Rendec <rrendec@arista.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-28 19:30 +0200 |
| Subject | Impact of CONFIG_PARAVIRT=y / mmap benchmark |
| Message-ID | <tq36p-2vD-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
Hi, I'm trying to assess the performance impact of enabling PARAVIRT (and XEN) in a custom kernel configuration. I came across a very old thread (https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/5/13/449) on this topic and the conclusion back then was that the performance impact was (arguably) around 1%. Does anyone still have a copy of Ingo Molnar's mmap-perf.c program (the old link is broken)? Would it still be relevant to use it for measuring performance in case of PARAVIRT? Last but not least, has anyone looked into PARAVIRT performance more recently? Thank you! Best regards, Radu Rendec
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-29 18:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tqoaS-AU-39@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1611237 |
On 03/28/17 10:17, Radu Rendec wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to assess the performance impact of enabling PARAVIRT (and > XEN) in a custom kernel configuration. I came across a very old thread > (https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/5/13/449) on this topic and the conclusion > back then was that the performance impact was (arguably) around 1%. > > Does anyone still have a copy of Ingo Molnar's mmap-perf.c program (the > old link is broken)? Would it still be relevant to use it for measuring > performance in case of PARAVIRT? > > Last but not least, has anyone looked into PARAVIRT performance more > recently? > > Thank you! > > Best regards, > Radu Rendec I have mmap-perf.c that says: /* Copyright Ingo Molnar (c) 2006 */ and no license info... Ingo? -- ~Randy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-29 20:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tqqcG-2eW-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1612098 |
* Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > On 03/28/17 10:17, Radu Rendec wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm trying to assess the performance impact of enabling PARAVIRT (and > > XEN) in a custom kernel configuration. I came across a very old thread > > (https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/5/13/449) on this topic and the conclusion > > back then was that the performance impact was (arguably) around 1%. > > > > Does anyone still have a copy of Ingo Molnar's mmap-perf.c program (the > > old link is broken)? Would it still be relevant to use it for measuring > > performance in case of PARAVIRT? > > > > Last but not least, has anyone looked into PARAVIRT performance more > > recently? > > > > Thank you! > > > > Best regards, > > Radu Rendec > > I have mmap-perf.c that says: > /* Copyright Ingo Molnar (c) 2006 */ > > and no license info... > Ingo? It's GPL v2, like the kernel. Thanks, Ingo
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Radu Rendec <rrendec@arista.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-31 12:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tr1Fg-3db-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1612218 |
On Wed, 2017-03-29 at 20:05 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > > > On 03/28/17 10:17, Radu Rendec wrote: > > > Does anyone still have a copy of Ingo Molnar's mmap-perf.c > > > program (the > > > old link is broken)? Would it still be relevant to use it for > > > measuring > > > performance in case of PARAVIRT? > > > > > I have mmap-perf.c that says: > > /* Copyright Ingo Molnar (c) 2006 */ > > > > and no license info... > > Ingo? > > It's GPL v2, like the kernel. > Randy, now that Ingo has clarified the license of that code, can you please share it? Thank you both for the feedback! Radu
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-31 19:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tr8dI-7tj-25@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1613833 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On 03/31/17 03:03, Radu Rendec wrote: > On Wed, 2017-03-29 at 20:05 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> * Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: >> >>> On 03/28/17 10:17, Radu Rendec wrote: >>>> Does anyone still have a copy of Ingo Molnar's mmap-perf.c >>>> program (the >>>> old link is broken)? Would it still be relevant to use it for >>>> measuring >>>> performance in case of PARAVIRT? >>>> >>> I have mmap-perf.c that says: >>> /* Copyright Ingo Molnar (c) 2006 */ >>> >>> and no license info... >>> Ingo? >> >> It's GPL v2, like the kernel. >> > > Randy, now that Ingo has clarified the license of that code, can you > please share it? > > Thank you both for the feedback! Sure, it's attached. Sorry for the delay. -- ~Randy
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web