From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Nov 23 13:32:32 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF6EE106564A for ; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 13:32:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from asmrookie@gmail.com) Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.155]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BA7F8FC1C for ; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 13:32:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from asmrookie@gmail.com) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l26so1230296fgb.35 for ; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 05:32:30 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender :to:subject:cc:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :content-disposition:x-google-sender-auth; bh=GUA/6fgoHqfCV20GQYQEl5wguGg66gd+Y21IlcGFl/8=; b=Gjv6kjVr3uMPJcY+98g0ECmiue8NM2mlBGGOXaRjP2BvGzlZQBaHBsOsqwGcPnIwXT a/B+Hvos5g/5ymUu5duo3ZOFL7FdrGhMHl3ggUgHzxCA4eJmpUC2GnQ+7M6zucYlKZnG Qy+5/6z9wMCfGPn+4XH3QYvuZTS85JvJhnRfc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:x-google-sender-auth; b=Mm06V8k0UYkHpTWRsH7c1oSAk6Kjc/IGO7PvqdvZtdgc4Dst/8YQIsBIXhMzNm3EWl RPDVc2Gmya2OyRPwF+wssjA5rkqJOzpLzWDDP5sWvUUIdvgYSJp6byMlRV3N9ROHOmfa mYASwk60jrQ1HUljf/cgAHEUbuankrGTMkspo= Received: by 10.86.50.6 with SMTP id x6mr1641852fgx.71.1227445342411; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 05:02:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.30.17 with HTTP; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 05:02:22 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3bbf2fe10811230502t3cc52809i6ac91082f780b730@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 14:02:22 +0100 From: "Attilio Rao" Sender: asmrookie@gmail.com To: "FreeBSD Arch" , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Google-Sender-Auth: a49a944b50fabd0c Cc: Joseph Koshy Subject: [PATCH] pmcannotate tool X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 13:32:32 -0000 pmcannotate is a tool that prints out sources of a tool (in C or assembly) with inlined profiling informations retrieved by a prior pmcstat analysis. If compared with things like callgraph generation, it prints out profiling on a per-instance basis and this can be useful to find, for example, badly handled caches, too high latency instructions, etc. The tool usage is pretty simple: pmcannotate [-a] [-h] [-k path] [-l level] samples.out binaryobj where samples.out is a pmcstat raw output and binaryobj is the binary object that has been profiled and is accessible for (ELF) symbols retrieving. The options are better described in manpages but briefly: - a: performs analysis on the assembly rather than the C source - h: usage and informations - k: specify a path for the kernel in order to locate correct objects for it - l: specify a lower boundary (in total percentage time) after which functions will be displayed nomore. A typical usage of pmcannotate can be some way of kernel annotation. For example, you can follow the steps below: 1) Generate a pmc raw output of system samples: # pmcstat -S ipm-unhalted-core-cycles -O samples.out 2) Copy the samples in the kernel building dir and cd there # cp samples.out /usr/src/sys/i386/compile/GENERIC/ ; cd /usr/src/sys/i386/compile/GENERIC/ 3) Run pmcannotate # pmcannotate -k . samples.out kernel.debug > kernel.ann In the example above please note that kernel.debug has to be used in order to produce a C annotated source. This happens because in order to get the binary sources we rely on the "objdump -S" command which wants binary compiled with debugging options. If not debugging options are present assembly analynsis is still possible, but no C-backed one will be available. objdump is not the only one tool on which pmcannotare rely. Infact, in order to have it working, pmcstat needs to be present too because we need to retrieve, from the pmcstat raw output, informations about the sampled PCs (in particular the name of the function they live within, its start and ending addresses). As long as currently pmcstat doesn't return those informations, a new option has been added to the tool (-m) which can extract (from a raw pmcstat output) all pc sampled, name of the functions and symbol bundaries they live within. Also please note that pmcannotate suffers of 2 limitations. Firstly, relying on objdump to dump the C source, with heavy optimization levels and lots of inlines the code gets difficult to read. Secondly, in particular on x86 but I guess it is not the only one case, the sample is always attributed to the instruction directly following the one that was interrupted. So in a C source view some samples may be attributed to the line below the one you're interested in. It's also important to keep in mind that if a line is a jump target or the start of a function the sample really belongs elsewhere. The patch can be found here: http://www.freebsd.org/~attilio/pmcannotate.diff/ where pmcannotate/ dir contains the code and needs to go under /usr/src/usr.sbin/ and the patch has diffs against pmcstat and Makefile. This work has been developed on the behalf of Nokia with important feedbacks and directions from Jeff Roberson. Testing and feedbacks (before it hits the tree) are welcome. Thanks, Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Nov 23 14:08:10 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6E42106564A for ; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 14:08:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from joseph.koshy@gmail.com) Received: from gv-out-0910.google.com (gv-out-0910.google.com [216.239.58.185]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B9238FC1C for ; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 14:08:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from joseph.koshy@gmail.com) Received: by gv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id n8so286530gve.39 for ; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 06:08:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=5IdbVNNiGGrSFSsWNGygTuCD6GV+CDYtxSU8hcDy9/E=; b=Zdu5w7Io3sezjtOsht+Ax6EJ5RoTyBthuNy28vh4ZRjVW6hCj3PvUqqa+IJ6UtRZui SAWMPnavY1tbG9duXKrsSXYvLDgYNTJvyK65ILThi9A4YswkjNysAmwS+NLZbIZKGBF+ Vh4UvAmMo/CdULvkbu+gVUgZd2JbsLPbts5QQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=rPBTuf/nfNcEtZrfYc8BVmR2tprGyGX1iiOMWFYXxj0Rt72pPLyct3E+ULEgeeQGwt IPOM1HIaVkcHZZkWNpBa9aXCaEj+xDvRyJAS5p1VDSwi4H4n6vhCbDVNvOO60Ipcrah5 aOzAoDubF/O4gJ6QTV9Bg0Hx3tHDjGkkY6z2g= Received: by 10.86.100.19 with SMTP id x19mr1651409fgb.29.1227447898349; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 05:44:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.96.13 with HTTP; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 05:44:58 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <84dead720811230544l625a565w158ccc1833b73799@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 19:14:58 +0530 From: "Joseph Koshy" To: "Attilio Rao" In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe10811230502t3cc52809i6ac91082f780b730@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <3bbf2fe10811230502t3cc52809i6ac91082f780b730@mail.gmail.com> X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 16:01:31 +0000 Cc: FreeBSD Arch , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] pmcannotate tool X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 14:08:10 -0000 > pmcannotate is a tool that prints out sources of a tool (in C or > assembly) with inlined profiling informations retrieved by a prior > pmcstat analysis. [snip] > This work has been developed on the behalf of Nokia with important > feedbacks and directions from Jeff Roberson. Are you "rookie" on IRC, who used to catch me with tons of questions whenever I logged on? > Testing and feedbacks (before it hits the tree) are welcome. The pmcstat changes seem fine. Koshy From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Nov 23 20:11:41 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99834106564A; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:11:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from redbull.bpaserver.net (redbullneu.bpaserver.net [213.198.78.217]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E0298FC12; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:11:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from outgoing.leidinger.net (pD9E2D989.dip.t-dialin.net [217.226.217.137]) by redbull.bpaserver.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 094882E0B5; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:56:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from webmail.leidinger.net (webmail.leidinger.net [192.168.1.102]) by outgoing.leidinger.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E93A514823B; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:56:03 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=Leidinger.net; s=outgoing-alex; t=1227470164; bh=hNCOUucfa+mQlnF2QCKnj5y9NjjX5ZaVy cNLhkaor4E=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=uriUDcRA/aekMoWVLXs7RJoFpqguWplrb86NXd2kS5BC95Rjwxi9NqQrQ2HdKmDAS wDZ70A71IVrDzsVe72GLNbf7thQATkKbbHVvApodoaeOcepy5Hnj6Bgt7JoQoX8kiI3 pih1y56x1CXa1SH4jTnd7xA0kAawGVAkZkEb3Syab+LIRsR5GGhop3K4ITkmMzpxAg4 GosMoHM9n1D3rv1CENnCaEpb7E4Q+RfFou64gGPjrgeQlsmv0Lt9r6Gigc9JepdAjTg ft0L1LKQc0v4kmJzfcD40BfFFqK1Iy0iIWcZ5NAfXp84yHfowaA/b/ebflLkKBtDMUF 03bFYZ/dA== Received: (from www@localhost) by webmail.leidinger.net (8.14.2/8.13.8/Submit) id mANJu3aG070936; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:56:03 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from Luna.Leidinger.net (Luna.Leidinger.net [192.168.2.100]) by webmail.leidinger.net (Horde Framework) with HTTP; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:56:03 +0100 Message-ID: <20081123205603.17752y578er4bcqo@webmail.leidinger.net> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:56:03 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger To: Attilio Rao References: <3bbf2fe10811230502t3cc52809i6ac91082f780b730@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe10811230502t3cc52809i6ac91082f780b730@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.3) / FreeBSD-8.0 X-BPAnet-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner-ID: 094882E0B5.2388B X-BPAnet-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-BPAnet-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, ORDB-RBL, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-14.9, required 6, BAYES_00 -15.00, DKIM_SIGNED 0.00, DKIM_VERIFIED -0.00, RDNS_DYNAMIC 0.10) X-BPAnet-MailScanner-From: alexander@leidinger.net X-Spam-Status: No Cc: FreeBSD Arch , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Joseph Koshy Subject: Re: [PATCH] pmcannotate tool X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:11:41 -0000 Quoting Attilio Rao (from Sun, 23 Nov 2008 =20 14:02:22 +0100): > pmcannotate is a tool that prints out sources of a tool (in C or > assembly) with inlined profiling informations retrieved by a prior > pmcstat analysis. > If compared with things like callgraph generation, it prints out > profiling on a per-instance basis and this can be useful to find, for > example, badly handled caches, too high latency instructions, etc. Can this also be used to do some code coverage analysis? What I'm =20 interested in is to enable something, run some tests in userland, =20 disable this something, and then run a tool which tells me which parts =20 of specific functions where run or not. At first I hoped I can use dtrace for this... I had a dtrace training =20 and seen the userland probes in action, where you can trace every ASM =20 instruction, but unfortunately you can not do this with kernel probes. =20 I tried with fbt and syscall on a Solaris 10 machine. I haven't tested =20 with FreeBSD-dtrace yet, but I doubt it is more advanced in this =20 regard than the Solaris dtrace. So I'm still searching. Bye, Alexander. --=20 We should keep the Panama Canal. After all, we stole it fair and square. =09=09-- S. I. Hayakawa http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID =3D 72077137 From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Nov 23 20:26:30 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6095F106564A for ; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:26:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from raykinsella78@gmail.com) Received: from qw-out-2122.google.com (qw-out-2122.google.com [74.125.92.25]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 088658FC0C for ; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:26:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from raykinsella78@gmail.com) Received: by qw-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 9so352775qwb.7 for ; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 12:26:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=i4ublRCwiw9D9OQd633fea8vGQGtOGSMvifdDSeMCNE=; b=XeMyeKmttouQzTePepSivJNzgUu/tjcxfdbEAwf9OG73Ysp6rKwYwWZEUfa5swn0Nl 54Hb0tEB4MISnNJOGsE2elI8hIq49NN8eaF/Aaw7JgYDA/JKMuWsEqin31u9Su7mctGp TK5tQHKndgA9rxIPVQfS38jnUz358BC7pSjZA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:references; b=ZbZZco9WWhNxt5e5QzrfcuMmWuOVSxMjQNq7Sl5LEsqecYTRZ7kkvGTpixu23c3Kc1 leyc0570ScWpc+/1yGDEVxrsL/X5crx/0AW2lCd3sv0VGQRwX2hhKVnRD2NeSozKDty6 iXBuWlsk4vEZjs+cip3M5V3brdTVKqbZKWC9g= Received: by 10.214.215.9 with SMTP id n9mr1587652qag.100.1227471989265; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 12:26:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.214.181.14 with HTTP; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 12:26:29 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <584ec6bb0811231226x7d1b53ccgc5e28bfc297009a2@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:26:29 +0000 From: "Ray Kinsella" To: "Attilio Rao" In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe10811230502t3cc52809i6ac91082f780b730@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <3bbf2fe10811230502t3cc52809i6ac91082f780b730@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: FreeBSD Arch , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Joseph Koshy Subject: Re: [PATCH] pmcannotate tool X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:26:30 -0000 I know I am going to really show my FreeBSD ignorance here, but this is a patch of FreeBSD 8.0 Current isn't it ? Thanks Ray Kinsella On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Attilio Rao wrote: > pmcannotate is a tool that prints out sources of a tool (in C or > assembly) with inlined profiling informations retrieved by a prior > pmcstat analysis. > If compared with things like callgraph generation, it prints out > profiling on a per-instance basis and this can be useful to find, for > example, badly handled caches, too high latency instructions, etc. > > The tool usage is pretty simple: > pmcannotate [-a] [-h] [-k path] [-l level] samples.out binaryobj > > where samples.out is a pmcstat raw output and binaryobj is the binary > object that has been profiled and is accessible for (ELF) symbols > retrieving. > The options are better described in manpages but briefly: > - a: performs analysis on the assembly rather than the C source > - h: usage and informations > - k: specify a path for the kernel in order to locate correct objects for > it > - l: specify a lower boundary (in total percentage time) after which > functions will be displayed nomore. > > A typical usage of pmcannotate can be some way of kernel annotation. > For example, you can follow the steps below: > 1) Generate a pmc raw output of system samples: > # pmcstat -S ipm-unhalted-core-cycles -O samples.out > 2) Copy the samples in the kernel building dir and cd there > # cp samples.out /usr/src/sys/i386/compile/GENERIC/ ; cd > /usr/src/sys/i386/compile/GENERIC/ > 3) Run pmcannotate > # pmcannotate -k . samples.out kernel.debug > kernel.ann > > In the example above please note that kernel.debug has to be used in > order to produce a C annotated source. This happens because in order > to get the binary sources we rely on the "objdump -S" command which > wants binary compiled with debugging options. > If not debugging options are present assembly analynsis is still > possible, but no C-backed one will be available. > objdump is not the only one tool on which pmcannotare rely. Infact, in > order to have it working, pmcstat needs to be present too because we > need to retrieve, from the pmcstat raw output, informations about the > sampled PCs (in particular the name of the function they live within, > its start and ending addresses). As long as currently pmcstat doesn't > return those informations, a new option has been added to the tool > (-m) which can extract (from a raw pmcstat output) all pc sampled, > name of the functions and symbol bundaries they live within. > > Also please note that pmcannotate suffers of 2 limitations. > Firstly, relying on objdump to dump the C source, with heavy > optimization levels and lots of inlines the code gets difficult to > read. Secondly, in particular on x86 but I guess it is not the only > one case, the sample is always attributed to the instruction directly > following the one that was interrupted. So in a C source view some > samples may be attributed to the line below the one you're interested > in. It's also important to keep in mind that if a line is a jump > target or the start of a function the sample really belongs elsewhere. > > The patch can be found here: > http://www.freebsd.org/~attilio/pmcannotate.diff/ > > where pmcannotate/ dir contains the code and needs to go under > /usr/src/usr.sbin/ and the patch has diffs against pmcstat and > Makefile. > > This work has been developed on the behalf of Nokia with important > feedbacks and directions from Jeff Roberson. > > Testing and feedbacks (before it hits the tree) are welcome. > > Thanks, > Attilio > > > -- > Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > To unsubscribe, send any mail to " > freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Nov 23 23:46:32 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49C171065686 for ; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 23:46:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from asmrookie@gmail.com) Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.158]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C712A8FC17 for ; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 23:46:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from asmrookie@gmail.com) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l26so1352725fgb.35 for ; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:46:30 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender :to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references :x-google-sender-auth; bh=5NSlstsAQS8jG+Qlq/nus2UrYQnzkgJzvrGs8nDnxCc=; b=gwbKDXLvD4Qkauvlsx3DFaCSKcRXZB6Mf7ij4iHdFCCBpRWqxCYMQvcLcA2Bug7KsU qCh5foJWH06jxQrJj8lno+Nj5ANuLDHpSZRGVgQSlyV35Afgsk4UButjXKM/ucSf3zac TqcZ8fEBcsLpMYNrpIvoZgYuIjl0d1lCP0KnE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references:x-google-sender-auth; b=WqDf0Phr5wlDonYjUpIcYnqdLzMk5uxkw4TBIuScajZuWZAyM0/9/rfuNHRBvGtl8m mQuP2snkjtUlVmDup930pz4J+ZVp90HqQtV4gBEfuGvPP6T1G9QyArET+Z/Fx7roOMif yjTOUhKz+SkjHrNAqEZ2S0F3HgdiStQe5yagA= Received: by 10.86.86.12 with SMTP id j12mr1852531fgb.64.1227483989893; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:46:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.30.17 with HTTP; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:46:29 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3bbf2fe10811231546r44bd2aafqa3d714a4955f52ad@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:46:29 +0100 From: "Attilio Rao" Sender: asmrookie@gmail.com To: "Alexander Leidinger" In-Reply-To: <20081123205603.17752y578er4bcqo@webmail.leidinger.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <3bbf2fe10811230502t3cc52809i6ac91082f780b730@mail.gmail.com> <20081123205603.17752y578er4bcqo@webmail.leidinger.net> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 65f3d96ee3cd32b8 Cc: FreeBSD Arch , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Joseph Koshy Subject: Re: [PATCH] pmcannotate tool X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 23:46:32 -0000 2008/11/23, Alexander Leidinger : > Quoting Attilio Rao (from Sun, 23 Nov 2008 14:02:22 > +0100): > > > > pmcannotate is a tool that prints out sources of a tool (in C or > > assembly) with inlined profiling informations retrieved by a prior > > pmcstat analysis. > > If compared with things like callgraph generation, it prints out > > profiling on a per-instance basis and this can be useful to find, for > > example, badly handled caches, too high latency instructions, etc. > > > > Can this also be used to do some code coverage analysis? What I'm > interested in is to enable something, run some tests in userland, disable > this something, and then run a tool which tells me which parts of specific > functions where run or not. Yes, this is exactly what it does. You can see traces for any sampled PC and so get a profiling anslysis on a per-instance basis. Thanks, Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Nov 23 23:47:01 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AD6410656D9 for ; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 23:47:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from asmrookie@gmail.com) Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.157]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02C8A8FC1D for ; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 23:47:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from asmrookie@gmail.com) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l26so1352724fgb.35 for ; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:47:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender :to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references :x-google-sender-auth; bh=9+Y+pnnEsKs/k0JGU4GpnkbmJqduyRszlodSbIES6fE=; b=c8EQsAq92njUfyarWcGNHZXgQJj+9p0tZB6EmB/CWrHxWhTF4UCkAvETbJyIFMPl6m N8okT+NXu6gw+O1t57rPNWnINFtKTQWIGdnf5MtkmmiurtwOafi5BeLByml8kAhwtaGb vG1yQFUi/mYr6JQg+roy57h4rNC0yorHqbDus= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references:x-google-sender-auth; b=MsUqSMFOUlU8aBmSFtiqssPzTuivY8VP6V+LQOqbT5kEfYMNrdZBgSEqvWs5UqH9Y+ xEqlJDrlfkLsAtXfTzH1sfa/EQB0TgSIJlezXwWhuo+FSI6ropEub8Cm6HyHWNmCAJQi xKa4Vj3Ry/cw+P3MuevGHVSaghkKoVFm7P7FA= Received: by 10.86.68.2 with SMTP id q2mr1872828fga.3.1227484020670; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:47:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.30.17 with HTTP; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:47:00 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3bbf2fe10811231547w651dea65h211b82ae4dcef005@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:47:00 +0100 From: "Attilio Rao" Sender: asmrookie@gmail.com To: "Ray Kinsella" In-Reply-To: <584ec6bb0811231226x7d1b53ccgc5e28bfc297009a2@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <3bbf2fe10811230502t3cc52809i6ac91082f780b730@mail.gmail.com> <584ec6bb0811231226x7d1b53ccgc5e28bfc297009a2@mail.gmail.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 85bb0ae8afebdc61 Cc: FreeBSD Arch , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Joseph Koshy Subject: Re: [PATCH] pmcannotate tool X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 23:47:01 -0000 2008/11/23, Ray Kinsella : > I know I am going to really show my FreeBSD ignorance here, but this is a > patch of FreeBSD 8.0 Current isn't it ? Yes, it is for 8.0. Is it giving you problems? Thanks, Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 24 00:21:00 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BCA11065670 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:21:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jroberson@jroberson.net) Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com (wf-out-1314.google.com [209.85.200.172]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 555D48FC17 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:21:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jroberson@jroberson.net) Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 24so2004796wfg.7 for ; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 16:21:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.163.1 with SMTP id l1mr1367426wfe.108.1227484397873; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:53:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?10.0.1.199? (cpe-66-91-191-118.hawaii.res.rr.com [66.91.191.118]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 20sm7179136wfi.47.2008.11.23.15.53.15 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:53:16 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 13:50:35 -1000 (HST) From: Jeff Roberson X-X-Sender: jroberson@desktop To: Attilio Rao In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe10811231546r44bd2aafqa3d714a4955f52ad@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20081123135009.I971@desktop> References: <3bbf2fe10811230502t3cc52809i6ac91082f780b730@mail.gmail.com> <20081123205603.17752y578er4bcqo@webmail.leidinger.net> <3bbf2fe10811231546r44bd2aafqa3d714a4955f52ad@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Joseph Koshy , Alexander Leidinger , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Arch Subject: Re: [PATCH] pmcannotate tool X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:21:00 -0000 On Mon, 24 Nov 2008, Attilio Rao wrote: > 2008/11/23, Alexander Leidinger : >> Quoting Attilio Rao (from Sun, 23 Nov 2008 14:02:22 >> +0100): >> >> >>> pmcannotate is a tool that prints out sources of a tool (in C or >>> assembly) with inlined profiling informations retrieved by a prior >>> pmcstat analysis. >>> If compared with things like callgraph generation, it prints out >>> profiling on a per-instance basis and this can be useful to find, for >>> example, badly handled caches, too high latency instructions, etc. >>> >> >> Can this also be used to do some code coverage analysis? What I'm >> interested in is to enable something, run some tests in userland, disable >> this something, and then run a tool which tells me which parts of specific >> functions where run or not. > > Yes, this is exactly what it does. > You can see traces for any sampled PC and so get a profiling anslysis > on a per-instance basis. I would add that it is only sampled so you don't see every instruction executed. You can use gcov for that however. That's precisely what it's for. Thanks, Jeff > > Thanks, > Attilio > > > -- > Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 24 07:39:30 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A1901065670; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:39:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from redbull.bpaserver.net (redbullneu.bpaserver.net [213.198.78.217]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1CC88FC16; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:39:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from outgoing.leidinger.net (pD9E2D05F.dip.t-dialin.net [217.226.208.95]) by redbull.bpaserver.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CA572E0B4; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:39:25 +0100 (CET) Received: from webmail.leidinger.net (webmail.leidinger.net [192.168.1.102]) by outgoing.leidinger.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 529AD14D413; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:39:21 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=Leidinger.net; s=outgoing-alex; t=1227512361; bh=fNcm2XHWMN/2yh3ubfXCLnPYnbFUCHtSm QyG0bbODKc=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=JZp2/R+p5zFmCRHYFobkbcqRGVQ6e4wVOghrElAgyQ6EW5MWVkkURn5ClTta8u72H vYw3zqu0TBteK7W8ySSD/Yb2bT/L1XbnMRykTd4mxuT0Cn1YTyWrPvn93vduQhStg+k Fv9JIcRrT1TmWy4GnCjR0TK3WCRGBnYxeSvolKeRmQvs7SlvWNI0JDG/RpGMW2RFw57 8fbsY8+Pe88JJoZFxADHMO5TGF6QCFxFx7nJJPsuXrYAl7TJtEVwCHcGW6qfP/0bOTn A0Y7LBSM1NwzwwzZVdugYZQwPHsDYi+3Ptpb/53Ih/0Q67s2LpK4T3EDrIwOB/oXCE1 JsCnOzXEA== Received: (from www@localhost) by webmail.leidinger.net (8.14.2/8.13.8/Submit) id mAO7dLYc002882; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:39:21 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from pslux.cec.eu.int (pslux.cec.eu.int [158.169.9.14]) by webmail.leidinger.net (Horde Framework) with HTTP; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:39:20 +0100 Message-ID: <20081124083920.16126d6j9o1q9mw4@webmail.leidinger.net> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:39:20 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger To: Attilio Rao References: <3bbf2fe10811230502t3cc52809i6ac91082f780b730@mail.gmail.com> <20081123205603.17752y578er4bcqo@webmail.leidinger.net> <3bbf2fe10811231546r44bd2aafqa3d714a4955f52ad@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe10811231546r44bd2aafqa3d714a4955f52ad@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.3) / FreeBSD-8.0 X-BPAnet-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner-ID: 2CA572E0B4.C3668 X-BPAnet-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-BPAnet-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, ORDB-RBL, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-13.504, required 6, BAYES_00 -15.00, DKIM_SIGNED 0.00, DKIM_VERIFIED -0.00, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE 1.40, RDNS_DYNAMIC 0.10) X-BPAnet-MailScanner-From: alexander@leidinger.net X-Spam-Status: No Cc: FreeBSD Arch , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Joseph Koshy Subject: Re: [PATCH] pmcannotate tool X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:39:30 -0000 Quoting Attilio Rao (from Mon, 24 Nov 2008 =20 00:46:29 +0100): > 2008/11/23, Alexander Leidinger : >> Quoting Attilio Rao (from Sun, 23 Nov 2008 14:02:22 >> +0100): >> >> >> > pmcannotate is a tool that prints out sources of a tool (in C or >> > assembly) with inlined profiling informations retrieved by a prior >> > pmcstat analysis. >> > If compared with things like callgraph generation, it prints out >> > profiling on a per-instance basis and this can be useful to find, for >> > example, badly handled caches, too high latency instructions, etc. >> > >> >> Can this also be used to do some code coverage analysis? What I'm >> interested in is to enable something, run some tests in userland, disable >> this something, and then run a tool which tells me which parts of specifi= c >> functions where run or not. > > Yes, this is exactly what it does. > You can see traces for any sampled PC and so get a profiling anslysis > on a per-instance basis. Cool. Would be great if you could provide some example in the man page =20 or as a script which shows how to do this for kernel code. This would =20 immediately show us how good our regression tests are for their =20 specific areas of test. Bye, Alexander. --=20 In a family recipe you just discovered in an old book, the most vital measurement will be illegible. http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID =3D 72077137 From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 24 07:40:27 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9AFB1065672; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:40:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from redbull.bpaserver.net (redbullneu.bpaserver.net [213.198.78.217]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 712F48FC22; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:40:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from outgoing.leidinger.net (pD9E2D05F.dip.t-dialin.net [217.226.208.95]) by redbull.bpaserver.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EACAF2E271; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:40:18 +0100 (CET) Received: from webmail.leidinger.net (webmail.leidinger.net [192.168.1.102]) by outgoing.leidinger.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B784F14D43D; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:40:15 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=Leidinger.net; s=outgoing-alex; t=1227512415; bh=xSGpxrwwW2ZGSDvXcOTY5a9g0ZBmm3ROf XK7bQLfOaA=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=ssPieHFxxvLLwh5K4cNsbiqx0+beYHS1OeoZgmLtAazYsdZzErPmI4enCSDydfDCa Mn0WHjU7VPvHtkHBPTEW0i5J6dKCv39yoHDTlnZeYwD6R9nHPfh9SsTnjIiAPyDl8xx o/kyHJ+0d/cMB1sNf99FMKxIv/NqdAv/XqwyFkS0jdf1M7z2DDvknAPlWa6IbYFSEw0 x0Gmz19EmwiuUuat9Ypr9bvnvAAnoIAvTFxE25A502Pds8UEaEBLd2g+0ai8gnWrKPE X6yaTcrfhlvL6D8Iv5YjSLmt2rE4hdfUu6qp3m2HXbPYy09iSctsJO257ZoMV4PNWW4 kS7367UEw== Received: (from www@localhost) by webmail.leidinger.net (8.14.2/8.13.8/Submit) id mAO7eFOJ003029; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:40:15 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from pslux.cec.eu.int (pslux.cec.eu.int [158.169.9.14]) by webmail.leidinger.net (Horde Framework) with HTTP; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:40:15 +0100 Message-ID: <20081124084015.84153bmq6411va68@webmail.leidinger.net> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:40:15 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger To: Jeff Roberson References: <3bbf2fe10811230502t3cc52809i6ac91082f780b730@mail.gmail.com> <20081123205603.17752y578er4bcqo@webmail.leidinger.net> <3bbf2fe10811231546r44bd2aafqa3d714a4955f52ad@mail.gmail.com> <20081123135009.I971@desktop> In-Reply-To: <20081123135009.I971@desktop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.3) / FreeBSD-8.0 X-BPAnet-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner-ID: EACAF2E271.EE169 X-BPAnet-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-BPAnet-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, ORDB-RBL, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-13.504, required 6, BAYES_00 -15.00, DKIM_SIGNED 0.00, DKIM_VERIFIED -0.00, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE 1.40, RDNS_DYNAMIC 0.10) X-BPAnet-MailScanner-From: alexander@leidinger.net X-Spam-Status: No Cc: Attilio Rao , FreeBSD Arch , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Joseph Koshy Subject: Re: [PATCH] pmcannotate tool X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:40:27 -0000 Quoting Jeff Roberson (from Sun, 23 Nov 2008 =20 13:50:35 -1000 (HST)): > > On Mon, 24 Nov 2008, Attilio Rao wrote: > >> 2008/11/23, Alexander Leidinger : >>> Quoting Attilio Rao (from Sun, 23 Nov 2008 14:02:2= 2 >>> +0100): >>> >>> >>>> pmcannotate is a tool that prints out sources of a tool (in C or >>>> assembly) with inlined profiling informations retrieved by a prior >>>> pmcstat analysis. >>>> If compared with things like callgraph generation, it prints out >>>> profiling on a per-instance basis and this can be useful to find, for >>>> example, badly handled caches, too high latency instructions, etc. >>>> >>> >>> Can this also be used to do some code coverage analysis? What I'm >>> interested in is to enable something, run some tests in userland, disabl= e >>> this something, and then run a tool which tells me which parts of specif= ic >>> functions where run or not. >> >> Yes, this is exactly what it does. >> You can see traces for any sampled PC and so get a profiling anslysis >> on a per-instance basis. > > I would add that it is only sampled so you don't see every =20 > instruction executed. You can use gcov for that however. That's =20 > precisely what it's for. How to use gcov for the kernel? Bye, Alexander. --=20 If only you knew she loved you, you could face the uncertainty of whether you love her. http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID =3D 72077137 From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 24 08:48:09 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6A71106567B for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:48:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from raykinsella78@gmail.com) Received: from qw-out-2122.google.com (qw-out-2122.google.com [74.125.92.24]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94CAF8FC1B for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:48:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from raykinsella78@gmail.com) Received: by qw-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 9so381437qwb.7 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:48:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=zgcFyX6E0gjEkJbC6JQieaZBFygoEgTifMuZI5nudSY=; b=WGiqvMvEtga1kEATfydidYJFGmDPxH5MuSHBp0lrvWljUYtKUsnh/0fYvzLWfbRwwk pqvx3FH2iQimo1qV1LT/sG1DjIRno2Xhj6na6fwq7C3WOrYs2ZTE7Ph+OtX9Vr/sWSEy /xdbAI1wGreSTfr4woMN+AvKB2N4Vrph5Xw9Q= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:references; b=r4VXThz4IgIDaoSaePhvRRkYHo7Uhu1BrbDncuQ0Xv9JC6G+UYzunn14QOWzhGxofq DkOumYwmuGh+YkjfzQZx2ha9PMZNpUIEpw6YWKaElLFJdHDAU78tp/l/+GRcDp9yPQg7 /HKUGSoTeM3cCqVpNLlTuFMN9zEIc86VqYXPE= Received: by 10.215.38.2 with SMTP id q2mr1774205qaj.7.1227516488720; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:48:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.214.181.14 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:48:08 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <584ec6bb0811240048x2304a759j2ac6fdea83a47773@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:48:08 +0000 From: "Ray Kinsella" To: "Attilio Rao" In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe10811231547w651dea65h211b82ae4dcef005@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <3bbf2fe10811230502t3cc52809i6ac91082f780b730@mail.gmail.com> <584ec6bb0811231226x7d1b53ccgc5e28bfc297009a2@mail.gmail.com> <3bbf2fe10811231547w651dea65h211b82ae4dcef005@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: FreeBSD Arch , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Joseph Koshy Subject: Re: [PATCH] pmcannotate tool X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:48:10 -0000 No, not at all. I am using 6.2 and 7.0 at the moment, I will build another disk with FreeBSD 8.0-CURRENT. Thanks Ray Kinsella On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 11:47 PM, Attilio Rao wrote: > 2008/11/23, Ray Kinsella : > > I know I am going to really show my FreeBSD ignorance here, but this is a > > patch of FreeBSD 8.0 Current isn't it ? > > Yes, it is for 8.0. > Is it giving you problems? > > Thanks, > Attilio > > > -- > Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein > From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 24 11:29:23 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20E77106564A for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:29:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gofp-freebsd-performance@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A15808FC0A for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:29:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gofp-freebsd-performance@m.gmane.org) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1L4Zd0-0003gs-Ki for freebsd-performance@freebsd.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:29:19 +0000 Received: from 195.208.174.178 ([195.208.174.178]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:29:18 +0000 Received: from vadim_nuclight by 195.208.174.178 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:29:18 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org From: Vadim Goncharov Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:29:07 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Nuclear Lightning @ Tomsk, TPU AVTF Hostel Lines: 71 Message-ID: X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.208.174.178 X-Comment-To: All User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.1 (FreeBSD) Sender: news Subject: hwpmc granularity and 6.4 network performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: vadim_nuclight@mail.ru List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:29:23 -0000 Hi! I've recently perfromed upgrade of busy production router from 6.2 to 6.4-PRE. I have added two lines to my kernel config and did usual make buildkernel: device hwpmc # Driver (also a loadable module) options HWPMC_HOOKS # Other necessary kernel hooks After rebooting with new world and kernel, I've noticed that CPU load has slightly increased (not measured, it is different every second anyway, as users do not genereate steady traffic), and in top -S 'swi1: net' became often in state *Giant, but it not used to do so on 6.2, while kernel config did not changed much, and device polling is still used. What could happen to this? Another question, I've read "Sixty second HWPMC howto" and tried to find out what exactly eats my CPU. BTW, that instruction did not apply exactly on my machine, this is what I did: # cd /tmp # pmcstat -S instructions -O /tmp/sample.out # pmcstat -R /tmp/sample.out -k /boot/kernel/kernel -g # gprof /boot/kernel/kernel p4-instr-retired/kernel.gmon > kernel.gmon.result Now in file kernel.gmon.result I see the following: granularity: each sample hit covers 4 byte(s) for 0.00% of 692213.00 seconds called/total parents index %time self descendents called+self name index called/total children [1] 31.7 219129.00 0.00 ipfw_chk [1] ----------------------------------------------- [...] Why does it show 0.00 in this column ? On next listing, flat profile, I see more readable listing, but columns are empty again: granularity: each sample hit covers 4 byte(s) for 0.00% of 692213.00 seconds % cumulative self self total time seconds seconds calls ms/call ms/call name 31.7 219129.00 219129.00 ipfw_chk [1] 10.4 291179.00 72050.00 bcmp [2] 6.1 333726.00 42547.00 rn_match [3] 2.7 352177.00 18451.00 generic_bzero [4] 2.4 368960.00 16783.00 strncmp [5] OK, I can conclude from this that I should optimize my ipfw ruleset, but that's all. I know from sources that ipfw_chk() is a big function with a bunch of 'case's in a large 'switch'. I want to know which parts of that switch are executed more often. It says in listing that granularity is 4 bytes, I assume that it has a sample for each of 4-byte chunks of binary code, so that it must have such information. My kernel is compiled with: makeoptions DEBUG=-g so kgdb does know where are instructions for each line of source code. How can I obtain this info from profiling? It also would be useful to know which places do calls to that bcmp() and rn_match(). -- WBR, Vadim Goncharov. ICQ#166852181 mailto:vadim_nuclight@mail.ru [Moderator of RU.ANTI-ECOLOGY][FreeBSD][http://antigreen.org][LJ:/nuclight] From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 24 20:47:55 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65E0F106564A for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:47:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from prvs=12149e54fe=killing@multiplay.co.uk) Received: from mail1.multiplay.co.uk (core6.multiplay.co.uk [85.236.96.23]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB4C68FC19 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:47:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from prvs=12149e54fe=killing@multiplay.co.uk) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=multiplay.co.uk; s=Multiplay; t=1227558496; x=1228163296; q=dns/txt; h=Received: Message-ID:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=Xvi78bHCI6c6ip5TU0Re5BWfDYK4Es7Y2Z qQRwBqchM=; b=lvknTjYgY8bwphGgom2ocPJUSrqVaPscLHbutb1ZfIlJn7WSeH yUkdOWkzVKDQ5Bm4EvW2xffboitj9Rl+RtIYdyH5wusRhinvoDzQJscbS5HvL+cH rGLZK4rJdNDKycLD9vsWPXKP2EA4HHXO5cQy9dRi32D442f2chHG6qOHQ= X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.8 (2007-02-13) on mail1.multiplay.co.uk X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.7 required=6.0 tests=BAYES_00, FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK, USER_IN_WHITELIST,USER_IN_WHITELIST_TO autolearn=ham version=3.1.8 Received: from r2d2 by mail1.multiplay.co.uk (MDaemon PRO v9.6.6) with ESMTP id md50006583826.msg for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:28:15 +0000 X-Authenticated-Sender: Killing@multiplay.co.uk X-MDRemoteIP: 213.123.247.160 X-Return-Path: prvs=12149e54fe=killing@multiplay.co.uk X-Envelope-From: killing@multiplay.co.uk X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Message-ID: From: "Steven Hartland" To: Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:28:11 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 X-Spam-Processed: mail1.multiplay.co.uk, Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:28:15 +0000 X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.multiplay.co.uk, Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:28:16 +0000 Subject: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:47:55 -0000 http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=os_threeway_2008&num=1 Was interesting until I saw this:- "However, it's important to reiterate that all three operating systems were left in their stock configurations and that no additional tweaking had occurred." I kernel debugging stuff still enabled in FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2, if so these results are useless and someone should contact the article writers to correct this. Regards Steve ================================================ This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it. In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone +44 845 868 1337 or return the E.mail to postmaster@multiplay.co.uk. From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 24 21:07:23 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 500D4106564A for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 21:07:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from smarthost1.sentex.ca (smarthost1.sentex.ca [64.7.153.18]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CE108FC1A for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 21:07:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from lava.sentex.ca (pyroxene.sentex.ca [199.212.134.18]) by smarthost1.sentex.ca (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id mAOL7JGh018078; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 16:07:19 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from mdt-xp.sentex.net (simeon.sentex.ca [192.168.43.27]) by lava.sentex.ca (8.13.8/8.13.3) with ESMTP id mAOL7JB9058269 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 24 Nov 2008 16:07:19 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Message-Id: <200811242107.mAOL7JB9058269@lava.sentex.ca> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 16:07:27 -0500 To: "Steven Hartland" , From: Mike Tancsa In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 64.7.153.18 Cc: Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 21:07:23 -0000 At 03:28 PM 11/24/2008, Steven Hartland wrote: >http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=os_threeway_2008&num=1 > >Was interesting until I saw this:- > >"However, it's important to reiterate that all three operating >systems were left in their stock configurations and that no >additional tweaking had occurred." They all seem to be fairly close in the majority of tests. In the conclusion they write, "In our LAME MP3 encoding test, Ubuntu 8.10 was the fastest followed by FreeBSD 7.1".... One needs to consider, the difference was 2%... Thats hardly anything to get excited about, especially if that difference can be accounted for by how much priority the scheduler gives to a userland app vs what the system is doing etc.... Also, it would have been interesting to see more multithreaded work loads. A lot of the apps they tested seemed to be single threaded, doing one job. ---Mike From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 24 21:25:07 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88992106564A for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 21:25:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from thompsa@FreeBSD.org) Received: from pele.citylink.co.nz (pele.citylink.co.nz [202.8.44.226]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C6828FC08 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 21:25:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from thompsa@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pele.citylink.co.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D2362BC47; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:59:12 +1300 (NZDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at citylink.co.nz Received: from pele.citylink.co.nz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (pele.citylink.co.nz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id avS8h6TOdi+4; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:59:08 +1300 (NZDT) Received: from citylink.fud.org.nz (unknown [202.8.44.45]) by pele.citylink.co.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:59:08 +1300 (NZDT) Received: by citylink.fud.org.nz (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 73EE711430; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:59:05 +1300 (NZDT) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:59:05 -0800 From: Andrew Thompson To: Steven Hartland Message-ID: <20081124205905.GA18565@citylink.fud.org.nz> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 23:50:10 +0000 Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 21:25:07 -0000 On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 08:28:11PM -0000, Steven Hartland wrote: > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=os_threeway_2008&num=1 > > Was interesting until I saw this:- > > "However, it's important to reiterate that all three operating systems were > left in their stock configurations and that no additional tweaking had > occurred." > > I kernel debugging stuff still enabled in FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2, if so these results are useless > and someone should contact the article writers to correct this. The stable branches do not have any debugging turned on, only head. This would have been true if they tested a point-zero release like 7.0 BETA 2. Andrew From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 24 23:52:36 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C537D1065675 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 23:52:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ssanders@softhammer.net) Received: from enterprise58.opnet.com (enterprise58.opnet.com [192.104.65.21]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 772268FC1D for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 23:52:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ssanders@softhammer.net) Received: from [172.16.12.251] (wtn12251.opnet.com [172.16.12.251]) by enterprise58.opnet.com (8.13.6/8.12.10) with ESMTP id mAOMpwlY009578 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 17:51:58 -0500 Message-ID: <492B3E3E.1000001@softhammer.net> Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:52:30 -0500 From: Stephen Sanders User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (Windows/20081105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OPNET-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: ssanders@softhammer.net Subject: boot loader bug??? X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 23:52:36 -0000 This may be a bad list to post to for this problem but I'm having an issue where in it appears that the boot loader fails and then overwrites the MBR with 0. The system boots to : F1 - Linux F3 - FreeBSD F5 - Drive 1" Default: But then fails on "boot error". Rebooting will not even make it to the prompt above and if one checks the MBR (via a PXE boot), it has been set to 512 bytes of 0. Sound familiar? Thanks From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 25 00:12:00 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AACCE1065670 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 00:12:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from phil.brennan@gmail.com) Received: from rn-out-0910.google.com (rn-out-0910.google.com [64.233.170.187]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6035B8FC13 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 00:12:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from phil.brennan@gmail.com) Received: by rn-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id j71so1752244rne.12 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 16:11:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=bhWUq5niqFpnz1VFz1ocRsqmfER6cSxdma0+u/cujhk=; b=u99cpBG/bOQ6Yr1h9MTLRgc8hWjrYqSqiXoU63YeJ3cxORLxkVpeHbdq/Ef9Qy271O LcFJ4eb1NSJXRVR4KaFx1XagszUPvr5XpaJlmeB9z9zP7h/je46xZ0IwH2N/k80Fll3M W7T7Q5QSRcRZ6chkHrYBJAozg6INAzkG1x5OA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=MW2zZqL5c6r8l7n6whxzT4+OGpf+47pnAbSgVy5OL9kH/tTslqJM09DB7/t6sJO+7z giJG+fBY7RHl2ubBfK+C668QbZVv4a3vRl5sggkF1M8IO50HpFh2JC7r3qdv5QvXv1RH rgm9WENG9pckQVMmFyxtgyC6hZ0mffMYE/rfY= Received: by 10.143.17.13 with SMTP id u13mr1881531wfi.180.1227570202061; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:43:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.50.17 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:43:22 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 23:43:22 +0000 From: "Phil Brennan" To: "Steven Hartland" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 00:12:00 -0000 Sorry thats one of the worst pieces of "journalism" I've ever encountered. Benchmarks useless ( single threaded ), no useful analysis, not even any speculation ( informed or otherwise ). On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 8:28 PM, Steven Hartland wrote: > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=os_threeway_2008&num=1 > > Was interesting until I saw this:- > > "However, it's important to reiterate that all three operating systems were > left in their stock configurations and that no additional tweaking had > occurred." > > I kernel debugging stuff still enabled in FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2, if so these > results are useless > and someone should contact the article writers to correct this. > > Regards > Steve > > ================================================ > This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the > person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the > recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise > disseminating it or any information contained in it. > In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please > telephone +44 845 868 1337 > or return the E.mail to postmaster@multiplay.co.uk. > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 25 01:14:06 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CFA81065670 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 01:14:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mat.macy@gmail.com) Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com (rv-out-0506.google.com [209.85.198.235]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F1F48FC16 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 01:14:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mat.macy@gmail.com) Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id b25so2258923rvf.43 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 17:14:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender :to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references :x-google-sender-auth; bh=i2w6drZ5YMf2VTmcizELfwjP/R3tvjzyHl057CpjLSA=; b=WuRZsRvGSD82yLkolg+17XxiD9rZ+SOMbJlVMJCs0gGqtjc2O38zGDWTpOE/8UXr3Y OuFANXqtwQzboPaa1YiJ4ue+ktmvLf0qwp1nFZiu7mM/29000DyYYQyQM47GW/ZVP1T/ c7UpVSgClRSrg0vK1OBCPfy7CT28ijq2lkXVA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references:x-google-sender-auth; b=BbXRv+02eUTZDqzrG4y99qsfzw9GKZJ3rF/HmAwtJ63Z8AP1u66qwoYe+IzEPalfCJ wzvTucuggM7FMSSAY+0GJsh+DqBM/+o+5DZ8F8O9h3LXv2nRZV13uNLnRZtO030+GFeg 2uRiSE+D7cilOEJPe64kZXqfGk03KAv+t7rxE= Received: by 10.141.42.10 with SMTP id u10mr2146084rvj.61.1227574031573; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 16:47:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.141.153.21 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 16:47:11 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3c1674c90811241647l39559628tb4f61d9e3d1c0272@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 00:47:11 +0000 From: "Kip Macy" Sender: mat.macy@gmail.com To: "Phil Brennan" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: X-Google-Sender-Auth: 39d832956c29f68c X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 02:25:37 +0000 Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Steven Hartland Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 01:14:06 -0000 On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 11:43 PM, Phil Brennan wrote: > Sorry thats one of the worst pieces of "journalism" I've ever > encountered. Benchmarks useless ( single threaded ), no useful > analysis, not even any speculation ( informed or otherwise ). It is representative. This stands out in your mind because you are familiar with the subject matter. > On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 8:28 PM, Steven Hartland > wrote: >> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=os_threeway_2008&num=1 >> >> Was interesting until I saw this:- >> >> "However, it's important to reiterate that all three operating systems were >> left in their stock configurations and that no additional tweaking had >> occurred." >> >> I kernel debugging stuff still enabled in FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2, if so these >> results are useless >> and someone should contact the article writers to correct this. >> >> Regards >> Steve >> >> ================================================ >> This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the >> person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the >> recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise >> disseminating it or any information contained in it. >> In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please >> telephone +44 845 868 1337 >> or return the E.mail to postmaster@multiplay.co.uk. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >> "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable. - Louis D. Brandeis From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 25 10:18:35 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B8CB106564A for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 10:18:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from liudasb@centras.lt) Received: from mascareta.delfi.lt (mascareta.delfi.lt [81.16.232.77]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32DB38FC14 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 10:18:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from liudasb@centras.lt) Received: by mascareta.delfi.lt (DELFI Mail, from userid 51) id 19E70100A6C4; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:53:59 +0200 (EET) To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org HTTP-Posting-Client: 193.219.9.41 HTTP-Posting-URI: webmail.delfi.lt:80/cmp/sendmail.php HTTP-Posting-User-Agent: Opera/9.62 (X11; Linux i686; U; en) Presto/2.1.1 Received: from 193.219.9.41 by webmail.delfi.lt via HTTP ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:53:59 +0200 From: =?windows-1257?B?TGl1ZGFzIEJha/B5cw==?= Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:53:59 +0200 X-Mailer: X-Priority: 3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; charset="windows-1257"; boundary="===================_4606496OH==_" Message-Id: <20081125095359.19E70100A6C4@mascareta.delfi.lt> X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 10:18:35 -0000 --===================_4606496OH==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hello, I did some calculations to take into account not only best result, but how much it is better. I used following formulas: If more is better then result/max(ubuntu, opensolaris, freebsd) If less is better then min(ubuntu, opensolaris, freebsd)/ result Results in phoronix article Ubuntu OpenSolaris FreeBSD LAME Encoding 43,3 53,51 45,87 7-Zip Compression 10612 9655,99 9323,66 Timed Gzip Compression 111,08 116,54 122,32 GnuPG 43,49 62,39 44,72 Tandem XML 30,89 54,52 29,01 Bork File Encrypter 78,4 55,31 79,36 Java SciMark FFT 455,53 480,93 447,24 Java SciMark matrix mul. 549,16 438,25 543,02 Java SciMark SOR 742,77 734 731,22 Java SciMark Montecarlo 162,11 167,89 160,53 Sunflow rendering 6,24 6,57 5,62 Bonnie++ seq 34861 61387 56124 Bonnie++ rand read 50511 60626 56255 Bonnie++ rand del 209,3 362,4 145,4 BYTE dhrystone 8604934,5 7486935,6 12122380,5 BYTE register 553949 555089,5 547974,3 BYTE fp 1284795 933096,5 1271991,7 Results after calculations Ubuntu OpenSolaris FreeBSD 1 0,81 0,94 1 0,91 0,88 1 0,95 0,91 1 0,7 0,97 0,94 0,53 1 0,71 1 0,7 0,95 1 0,93 1 0,8 0,99 1 0,99 0,98 0,97 1 0,96 0,9 0,86 1 0,57 1 0,91 0,83 1 0,93 0,58 1 0,4 0,71 0,62 1 1 1 0,99 1 0,73 0,99 SUM 15,14 14,89 15,48 AVERAGE 0,89 0,88 0,91 I hope results are readable -- Liudas >At 03:28 PM 11/24/2008, Steven Hartland wrote: >>http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php? page=article&item=os_threeway_2008&num=1 >> >>Was interesting until I saw this:- >> >>"However, it's important to reiterate that all three operating >>systems were left in their stock configurations and that no >>additional tweaking had occurred." > >They all seem to be fairly close in the majority of tests. > >In the conclusion they write, "In our LAME MP3 encoding test, Ubuntu >8.10 was the fastest followed by FreeBSD 7.1".... One needs to >consider, the difference was 2%... Thats hardly anything to get >excited about, especially if that difference can be accounted for by >how much priority the scheduler gives to a userland app vs what the >system is doing etc.... > >Also, it would have been interesting to see more multithreaded work >loads. A lot of the apps they tested seemed to be single threaded, >doing one job. > > ---Mike > >_______________________________________________ >freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance- unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > --===================_4606496OH==_-- From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 25 11:08:37 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67C341065677 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:08:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gofp-freebsd-performance@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E202A8FC2A for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:08:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gofp-freebsd-performance@m.gmane.org) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1L4vmU-0002Or-3M for freebsd-performance@freebsd.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:08:34 +0000 Received: from lara.cc.fer.hr ([161.53.72.113]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:08:34 +0000 Received: from ivoras by lara.cc.fer.hr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:08:34 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org From: Ivan Voras Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:08:27 +0100 Lines: 60 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig8E1F6E2D12B25CE4FF20A293" X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: lara.cc.fer.hr User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20080925) In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 Sender: news Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:08:37 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig8E1F6E2D12B25CE4FF20A293 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Steven Hartland wrote: > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=3Darticle&item=3Dos_threeway_2008= &num=3D1 >=20 > Was interesting until I saw this:- >=20 The results seem well within expectations, for the sort of benchmarks they did: there is little difference between the systems. Depending on the details of how they did the benchmarks and how they processed the results (if at all), the results can even be within the margin of error (i.e. useless for mutual comparison except to show the systems are all very similar). The benchmarks they did are mostly focused on number crunching and do not even touch the area of system scalability to multiple CPUs, which could have been easily done but they chose not to. Number crunching is a bad choice for system scalability measure because down to the metal, all systems use similar compilers and there's nothing the OS can do to improve (or actually hinder, in the common case) CPU's execution of math code. For example, they could have included the "shells concurrent" benchmark from unixbench, started multiple bonnie++'s in parallel, and included a few system benchmarks like lighttpd+siege, parallel gzip (pigz) and blogbench. > "However, it's important to reiterate that all three operating systems > were left in their stock configurations and that no additional tweaking= > had occurred." >=20 > I kernel debugging stuff still enabled in FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2, if so > these results are useless > and someone should contact the article writers to correct this. There is no debugging in -STABLE. WYSIWYG :) --------------enig8E1F6E2D12B25CE4FF20A293 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJK9yrldnAQVacBcgRAi9gAKDTJrjY5Aip2SS4eVZnL4ljXAQ43wCeIIUm aAm2L89dP41YSge7EbdQvrg= =uGmT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig8E1F6E2D12B25CE4FF20A293-- From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 25 17:16:57 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24AF01065673 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:16:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from smarthost1.sentex.ca (smarthost1.sentex.ca [64.7.153.18]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6CE58FC0A for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:16:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from lava.sentex.ca (pyroxene.sentex.ca [199.212.134.18]) by smarthost1.sentex.ca (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id mAPHGrDQ044379; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:16:53 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from mdt-xp.sentex.net (simeon.sentex.ca [192.168.43.27]) by lava.sentex.ca (8.13.8/8.13.3) with ESMTP id mAPHGreB063704 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:16:53 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Message-Id: <200811251716.mAPHGreB063704@lava.sentex.ca> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:17:02 -0500 To: "Adrian Chadd" From: Mike Tancsa In-Reply-To: References: <200811242107.mAOL7JB9058269@lava.sentex.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 64.7.153.18 Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Steven Hartland Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:16:57 -0000 At 12:06 PM 11/25/2008, Adrian Chadd wrote: >2% may not sound like a lot but it starts becoming measurable savings >when the number of boxes involved is ${LARGE}. True, but then again is there such a thing as a synthetic benchmark that would have a margin of error less than 2% while representing your real world application mix? ---Mike From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 25 17:30:17 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45AF7106575F for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:30:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from qw-out-2122.google.com (qw-out-2122.google.com [74.125.92.25]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F02168FC53 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:30:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: by qw-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 9so34888qwb.7 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:30:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender :to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references :x-google-sender-auth; bh=9VyegABIteKp5LL/YrmCkKJ3iEYi1JeLPJ4l9r8Nzcg=; b=YfizpMBDFK1VcV+UPmKGBAA0pLHxA4zHIli4dbVyb41+mCmjTbzuqry6DA/DZSYNp+ BoWxkSOt8SoeaSnonzPOjstME8mrd7888P2QBHtbMv3yB0LFWIV+i47VmN+1MghaLlzo H/7OrHSbjc/OtRKMCErrc88mCyZ4VkOiSYl1g= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references:x-google-sender-auth; b=T6mpNyh6yPgiRytUS+Tpk6+nYLzESL6tc/lKmycSR8nmR41LF3x/ooYXQnybU088Kx CVoNYSIkscz+pQ3ocFv2BUoQOJ9svxbLaqhqTOrwks43N5dHugowbr2Wi68htBNtRyWQ yhHksX18k6MlMUSjqVv87HBSmhoDaMFO8xjiQ= Received: by 10.214.11.1 with SMTP id 1mr3995160qak.199.1227634210850; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:30:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.215.41.1 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:30:10 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:30:10 -0500 From: "Adrian Chadd" Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com To: "Mike Tancsa" In-Reply-To: <200811251716.mAPHGreB063704@lava.sentex.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200811242107.mAOL7JB9058269@lava.sentex.ca> <200811251716.mAPHGreB063704@lava.sentex.ca> X-Google-Sender-Auth: c4c6b8734642d9ec Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Steven Hartland Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:30:17 -0000 2008/11/25 Mike Tancsa : > At 12:06 PM 11/25/2008, Adrian Chadd wrote: >> >> 2% may not sound like a lot but it starts becoming measurable savings >> when the number of boxes involved is ${LARGE}. > > True, but then again is there such a thing as a synthetic benchmark that > would have a margin of error less than 2% while representing your real world > application mix? It depends, what do you think people read when making decisions? :) Bout the only thing that could fix this is for people involved with FreeBSD to re-do the benchmark, documenting how it was done wrong, and reporting on the results. Note that I didn't say "show FreeBSD is better", at least not in the initial round. Adrian From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 25 17:30:31 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37B821065672 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:30:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from qw-out-2122.google.com (qw-out-2122.google.com [74.125.92.25]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E458F8FC1E for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:30:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: by qw-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 9so34888qwb.7 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:30:30 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender :to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references :x-google-sender-auth; bh=YE4dVA7qxuAlf7LwBJh6T0LHp35NdmClFQq0pxf2T18=; b=wAqZzn9FyxJqDK4LVDiLYRL/G8STzmo6UxVrEZmUTAJ7O/Ui/V+S3QfrY3lyPHMB6V LYy7L2Tu1d8g6wPGu4WcL/UgagDke7H7xfnkEHxVF6CuXP8wG6C2/DShFJOSv34SDO0n SFrD/WWwEk4sLKuGTDTJvCE0o3wrPoVJJGX9o= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references:x-google-sender-auth; b=P6p3HuLIfu7cFMGjUXSfwSHtxMTAah39RHQbx1l1T5PeF/tPPxar1lc8J+XDFG9qRg Pspa4dUfRT2j8D8lSqsJJtCr5lrVbl1ULk1b93fpC5NKWW0WI2Ur+lKJCyddBaoDX4vZ rjcxfu69/bJoWMwMw2imaGV2nwVpAQrqrVJ+8= Received: by 10.214.45.2 with SMTP id s2mr3944730qas.348.1227632801965; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:06:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.215.41.1 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:06:41 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:06:41 -0500 From: "Adrian Chadd" Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com To: "Mike Tancsa" In-Reply-To: <200811242107.mAOL7JB9058269@lava.sentex.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200811242107.mAOL7JB9058269@lava.sentex.ca> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 1daefb9b3f2fd7a4 Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Steven Hartland Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:30:31 -0000 2% may not sound like a lot but it starts becoming measurable savings when the number of boxes involved is ${LARGE}. 2c, Adrian 2008/11/24 Mike Tancsa : > At 03:28 PM 11/24/2008, Steven Hartland wrote: >> >> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=os_threeway_2008&num=1 >> >> Was interesting until I saw this:- >> >> "However, it's important to reiterate that all three operating systems >> were left in their stock configurations and that no additional tweaking had >> occurred." > > They all seem to be fairly close in the majority of tests. > > In the conclusion they write, "In our LAME MP3 encoding test, Ubuntu 8.10 > was the fastest followed by FreeBSD 7.1".... One needs to consider, the > difference was 2%... Thats hardly anything to get excited about, especially > if that difference can be accounted for by how much priority the scheduler > gives to a userland app vs what the system is doing etc.... > > Also, it would have been interesting to see more multithreaded work loads. > A lot of the apps they tested seemed to be single threaded, doing one job. > > ---Mike > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 25 18:00:08 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74800106564A for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:00:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rdivacky@lev.vlakno.cz) Received: from vlakno.cz (77-93-215-190.static.masterinter.net [77.93.215.190]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B5FB8FC12 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:00:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rdivacky@lev.vlakno.cz) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vlakno.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BB789CB24E; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:37:00 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at vlakno.cz Received: from vlakno.cz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (lev.vlakno.cz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yfW3qFT141PW; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:36:58 +0100 (CET) Received: from lev.vlakno.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vlakno.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2ECE29CB754; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:36:58 +0100 (CET) Received: (from rdivacky@localhost) by lev.vlakno.cz (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id mAPHavOH050522; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:36:57 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from rdivacky) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:36:57 +0100 From: Roman Divacky To: Ivan Voras Message-ID: <20081125173657.GA50429@freebsd.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:00:08 -0000 On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 12:08:27PM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote: > Steven Hartland wrote: > > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=os_threeway_2008&num=1 > > > > Was interesting until I saw this:- > > > > The results seem well within expectations, for the sort of benchmarks > they did: there is little difference between the systems. Depending on > the details of how they did the benchmarks and how they processed the > results (if at all), the results can even be within the margin of error > (i.e. useless for mutual comparison except to show the systems are all > very similar). > > The benchmarks they did are mostly focused on number crunching and do > not even touch the area of system scalability to multiple CPUs, which > could have been easily done but they chose not to. Number crunching is a > bad choice for system scalability measure because down to the metal, all > systems use similar compilers and there's nothing the OS can do to I believe most of the synthetic numbers (mp3 encoding etc.) difference comes from the different version of gcc the different OS uses... From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 25 18:10:06 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98FB01065672 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:10:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gofp-freebsd-performance@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 222A68FC18 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:10:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gofp-freebsd-performance@m.gmane.org) Received: from root by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1L52MN-0001Uj-A0 for freebsd-performance@freebsd.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:10:03 +0000 Received: from 93-138-72-174.adsl.net.t-com.hr ([93.138.72.174]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:10:03 +0000 Received: from ivoras by 93-138-72-174.adsl.net.t-com.hr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:10:03 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org From: Ivan Voras Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 19:06:25 +0100 Lines: 54 Message-ID: References: <20081125173657.GA50429@freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigEBB76886489FF35CA724C7FF" X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 93-138-72-174.adsl.net.t-com.hr User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (Windows/20081105) In-Reply-To: <20081125173657.GA50429@freebsd.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Sender: news Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:10:06 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigEBB76886489FF35CA724C7FF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Roman Divacky wrote: > On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 12:08:27PM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote: >> Steven Hartland wrote: >>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=3Darticle&item=3Dos_threeway_20= 08&num=3D1 >>> >>> Was interesting until I saw this:- >>> >> The results seem well within expectations, for the sort of benchmarks >> they did: there is little difference between the systems. Depending on= >> the details of how they did the benchmarks and how they processed the >> results (if at all), the results can even be within the margin of erro= r >> (i.e. useless for mutual comparison except to show the systems are all= >> very similar). >> >> The benchmarks they did are mostly focused on number crunching and do >> not even touch the area of system scalability to multiple CPUs, which >> could have been easily done but they chose not to. Number crunching is= a >> bad choice for system scalability measure because down to the metal, a= ll >> systems use similar compilers and there's nothing the OS can do to >=20 > I believe most of the synthetic numbers (mp3 encoding etc.) difference > comes from the different version of gcc the different OS uses... You're very likely right. Ubuntu 8.10 has gcc 4.3.x - it could make for the small difference in gzip and 7z compression performance. --------------enigEBB76886489FF35CA724C7FF Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkksPqEACgkQldnAQVacBchyFgCdEh5iQeg+Paq/1HjjyRtPikj1 alsAn3ycA1yTkNKxCZQ/ekHT/71xh+zE =zNPW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigEBB76886489FF35CA724C7FF-- From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 25 20:02:41 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1182210656F1 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 20:02:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from qw-out-2122.google.com (qw-out-2122.google.com [74.125.92.26]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B76988FC22 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 20:02:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: by qw-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 9so52795qwb.7 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:02:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender :to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references :x-google-sender-auth; bh=7CqwTplN85CxUUZgCsCYW+KlvTVpemZyAnXayk8H9+A=; b=kUUQFpNTIYkBAlhCIfWSdxyWBIIyuKivYvNZStzj0ObRD5+mJMFpXZEE+4l10XPktG g9HpOBY91qCS1XB+/1GlSUmAGzDYs198SxuHK7NG42EKX1PtfAalmZPqJ7QMdwtSZzIi gvyUYfJSRRUxnGlbnM13HckqCxHwW62UDDEF8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references:x-google-sender-auth; b=JVvv8RwMiR/g42IfUsXrF8qD4Hkaur1jYv92U4iWL7GgVm5k+zFo/Iih/EA+DK/g2h g90BV1gJUkpXSF7RDceQwxzIyjXcmJNwel7/7nqlmPfTHOoUA8wPE5qQ8Xl2UBQ3JULX Wd/CqYwfBu/Sqf7efrusZVIMTwr37Nf41p7AM= Received: by 10.215.13.16 with SMTP id q16mr4267272qai.237.1227643359893; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:02:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.215.41.1 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:02:39 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 15:02:39 -0500 From: "Adrian Chadd" Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com To: "Ivan Voras" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20081125173657.GA50429@freebsd.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 2947432e4a76c2d5 Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 20:02:41 -0000 2008/11/25 Ivan Voras : >> I believe most of the synthetic numbers (mp3 encoding etc.) difference >> comes from the different version of gcc the different OS uses... > > You're very likely right. Ubuntu 8.10 has gcc 4.3.x - it could make for > the small difference in gzip and 7z compression performance. Well, that should be a reasonably easy thing to test and feed back to the author. Adrian From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 25 20:09:20 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DB6B1065701 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 20:09:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from qw-out-2122.google.com (qw-out-2122.google.com [74.125.92.25]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E42D38FC1A for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 20:09:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: by qw-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 9so53448qwb.7 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:09:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender :to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references :x-google-sender-auth; bh=iKRb8wla2kjbbbA9S/rRunxwPpeYvptahT0Gta1tMpY=; b=Cwy+4ky8dbIbC9MTw5hQB/69PUGEfoi42DmhA6Zl0FuM/QflS3FnZDoLgxT6eoJmnz POEkaxBBrDVEg6e/mw9YiKgBQZmjessBrevmhruWRotYu8I7ms+//ZNjzbCoL3TAGyvG 8uOmuXFUS6DyOo/hqwd/S1D/OwG/cxSFc2z8s= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references:x-google-sender-auth; b=gP5pDpCu62jq4g7FNdkUbpqiMaGm7EAcVS1CWHF1YBefk/vIpIh7NMEhvuaY6fwDrq NvP9Jz623v+COQYvgfwGGka824iRHlCuIcd+fjsS+21svU8kmq7amUyEf9jB1x9Eco22 OnYDD75uKiUcxgf95tnIQuyXlo6Pg9M2c1aeI= Received: by 10.215.38.2 with SMTP id q2mr4294309qaj.7.1227643759280; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:09:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.215.41.1 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:09:19 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 15:09:19 -0500 From: "Adrian Chadd" Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com To: vadim_nuclight@mail.ru In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: X-Google-Sender-Auth: 02e52403a4d4b05c Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: hwpmc granularity and 6.4 network performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 20:09:20 -0000 A few things! * Since you've changed two things - hwpmc _AND_ the kernel version - you can't easily conclude which one (if any!) has any influence on Giant showing up in your top output. I suggest recompiling without hwpmc and seeing if the behaviour changes. * The gprof utility expects something resembling "time" for the sampling data, but pmcstat doesn't record time, it records "events". The counts you see in gprof are "events", so change "seconds" to "events" in your reading of the gprof output. * I don't know if the backported pmc to 6.4 handles stack call graphs or not. Easy way to check - pmcstat -R sample.out | more ; see if you just see "sample" lines or "sample" and "callgraph" lines. * I bet that ipfw_chk is a big enough hint. How big is your ipfw ruleset? :) Adrian 2008/11/24 Vadim Goncharov : > Hi! > > I've recently perfromed upgrade of busy production router from 6.2 to 6.4-PRE. > I have added two lines to my kernel config and did usual make buildkernel: > > device hwpmc # Driver (also a loadable module) > options HWPMC_HOOKS # Other necessary kernel hooks > > After rebooting with new world and kernel, I've noticed that CPU load has > slightly increased (not measured, it is different every second anyway, as > users do not genereate steady traffic), and in top -S 'swi1: net' became > often in state *Giant, but it not used to do so on 6.2, while kernel config > did not changed much, and device polling is still used. What could happen > to this? > > Another question, I've read "Sixty second HWPMC howto" and tried to find out > what exactly eats my CPU. BTW, that instruction did not apply exactly on my > machine, this is what I did: > > # cd /tmp > # pmcstat -S instructions -O /tmp/sample.out > # pmcstat -R /tmp/sample.out -k /boot/kernel/kernel -g > # gprof /boot/kernel/kernel p4-instr-retired/kernel.gmon > kernel.gmon.result > > Now in file kernel.gmon.result I see the following: > > granularity: each sample hit covers 4 byte(s) for 0.00% of 692213.00 seconds > > called/total parents > index %time self descendents called+self name index > called/total children > > > [1] 31.7 219129.00 0.00 ipfw_chk [1] > > ----------------------------------------------- > > > [...] > > Why does it show 0.00 in this column ? > > On next listing, flat profile, I see more readable listing, but columns are > empty again: > > granularity: each sample hit covers 4 byte(s) for 0.00% of 692213.00 seconds > > % cumulative self self total > time seconds seconds calls ms/call ms/call name > 31.7 219129.00 219129.00 ipfw_chk [1] > 10.4 291179.00 72050.00 bcmp [2] > 6.1 333726.00 42547.00 rn_match [3] > 2.7 352177.00 18451.00 generic_bzero [4] > 2.4 368960.00 16783.00 strncmp [5] > > OK, I can conclude from this that I should optimize my ipfw ruleset, but > that's all. I know from sources that ipfw_chk() is a big function with a > bunch of 'case's in a large 'switch'. I want to know which parts of that > switch are executed more often. It says in listing that granularity is > 4 bytes, I assume that it has a sample for each of 4-byte chunks of binary > code, so that it must have such information. My kernel is compiled with: > > makeoptions DEBUG=-g > > so kgdb does know where are instructions for each line of source code. > How can I obtain this info from profiling? It also would be useful to know > which places do calls to that bcmp() and rn_match(). > > -- > WBR, Vadim Goncharov. ICQ#166852181 mailto:vadim_nuclight@mail.ru > [Moderator of RU.ANTI-ECOLOGY][FreeBSD][http://antigreen.org][LJ:/nuclight] > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 25 21:06:50 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60CF1106567C for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 21:06:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ivoras@gmail.com) Received: from fk-out-0910.google.com (fk-out-0910.google.com [209.85.128.187]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEE598FC2E for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 21:06:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ivoras@gmail.com) Received: by fk-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id k31so107127fkk.11 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 13:06:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender :to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references :x-google-sender-auth; bh=8DJB6yjaE1hJdWkWbe7rtdr8/6O3DDTSpzwCWlzFCKQ=; b=NW0sK28jGR1v9nHosbZ/exdGPikbygajU8dYvYCOo/Fr+KKaM857WduYEUQJCXUI66 gtr57+3a4KxpObyuE/HSBRbo3d2Aos9Fy8X89sO22g56LqmSPgVzTMORhe+CtzG4FfYE kBShvb+akKxI0XViXls+fuYL4hB4vFjJurn5g= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references:x-google-sender-auth; b=tO3VatM0IYjvNnOuzOqNYmmPQg6T7KsKTZUbyoU3skaXKqxk6XawKgSFo9t8MqfgVE c7OGpah1xcVL005n47a0K0lvRxVqmGkSeVpDw9UhVtKvTE5khIj3Zsl99IKi6uFEVy56 1NA/b/8OL8VNhMHGVyk1XRE7KTKViua2eF/sI= Received: by 10.181.224.3 with SMTP id b3mr1658614bkr.183.1227645995492; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:46:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.181.58.1 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 12:46:35 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <9bbcef730811251246nf39e825s95a25ae394948e06@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 21:46:35 +0100 From: "Ivan Voras" Sender: ivoras@gmail.com To: "Adrian Chadd" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20081125173657.GA50429@freebsd.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 8e76e6ede6105ecc Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 21:06:50 -0000 2008/11/25 Adrian Chadd : > 2008/11/25 Ivan Voras : > >>> I believe most of the synthetic numbers (mp3 encoding etc.) difference >>> comes from the different version of gcc the different OS uses... >> >> You're very likely right. Ubuntu 8.10 has gcc 4.3.x - it could make for >> the small difference in gzip and 7z compression performance. > > Well, that should be a reasonably easy thing to test and feed back to > the author. OTOH if the goal is to measure "operating system" performance, this must also include the compiler, libraries and all. (for example, what does Solaris default to nowadays? I think it ships with gcc but not as default). The hold on gcc 4.3 in FreeBSD is, after all, political (licencing). If FreeBSD base ever switches to LLVM+clang, this means libc will be compiled with a non-gcc compiler which will forever change the performance for simple "real world" benchmarks. From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 25 23:40:24 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 658C81065670; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 23:40:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from proxy.meer.net (proxy.meer.net [64.13.141.13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B98D8FC14; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 23:40:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from mail.meer.net (mail.meer.net [64.13.141.3]) by proxy.meer.net (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id mAPN0ZeL080221; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 15:00:48 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from mail2.meer.net (mail2.meer.net [64.13.141.16]) by mail.meer.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/meer) with ESMTP id mAPMvuiH033877; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 14:57:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from minion.local.neville-neil.com (209.249.190.254.available.above.net [209.249.190.254] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by mail2.meer.net (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id mAPMvtZU025484; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 14:57:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:57:54 -0500 Message-ID: From: gnn@freebsd.org To: "Attilio Rao" In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe10811230502t3cc52809i6ac91082f780b730@mail.gmail.com> References: <3bbf2fe10811230502t3cc52809i6ac91082f780b730@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.5 (Almost Unreal) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.9 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Goj=F2?=) APEL/10.7 Emacs/22.3 (i386-apple-darwin9.5.0) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Canit-CHI2: 0.50 X-Bayes-Prob: 0.5 (Score 0, tokens from: ) X-Spam-Score: 0.10 () [Tag at 5.00] COMBINED_FROM X-CanItPRO-Stream: default X-Canit-Stats-ID: 2401205 - 6363b7530a94 X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . roaringpenguin . com) on 64.13.141.13 Cc: FreeBSD Arch , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Joseph Koshy Subject: Re: [PATCH] pmcannotate tool X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 23:40:24 -0000 At Sun, 23 Nov 2008 14:02:22 +0100, Attilio Rao wrote: > > pmcannotate is a tool that prints out sources of a tool (in C or > assembly) with inlined profiling informations retrieved by a prior > pmcstat analysis. > If compared with things like callgraph generation, it prints out > profiling on a per-instance basis and this can be useful to find, for > example, badly handled caches, too high latency instructions, etc. > > The tool usage is pretty simple: > pmcannotate [-a] [-h] [-k path] [-l level] samples.out binaryobj > > where samples.out is a pmcstat raw output and binaryobj is the binary > object that has been profiled and is accessible for (ELF) symbols > retrieving. > The options are better described in manpages but briefly: > - a: performs analysis on the assembly rather than the C source > - h: usage and informations > - k: specify a path for the kernel in order to locate correct objects for it > - l: specify a lower boundary (in total percentage time) after which > functions will be displayed nomore. > > A typical usage of pmcannotate can be some way of kernel annotation. > For example, you can follow the steps below: > 1) Generate a pmc raw output of system samples: > # pmcstat -S ipm-unhalted-core-cycles -O samples.out > 2) Copy the samples in the kernel building dir and cd there > # cp samples.out /usr/src/sys/i386/compile/GENERIC/ ; cd > /usr/src/sys/i386/compile/GENERIC/ > 3) Run pmcannotate > # pmcannotate -k . samples.out kernel.debug > kernel.ann > > In the example above please note that kernel.debug has to be used in > order to produce a C annotated source. This happens because in order > to get the binary sources we rely on the "objdump -S" command which > wants binary compiled with debugging options. > If not debugging options are present assembly analynsis is still > possible, but no C-backed one will be available. > objdump is not the only one tool on which pmcannotare rely. Infact, in > order to have it working, pmcstat needs to be present too because we > need to retrieve, from the pmcstat raw output, informations about the > sampled PCs (in particular the name of the function they live within, > its start and ending addresses). As long as currently pmcstat doesn't > return those informations, a new option has been added to the tool > (-m) which can extract (from a raw pmcstat output) all pc sampled, > name of the functions and symbol bundaries they live within. > > Also please note that pmcannotate suffers of 2 limitations. > Firstly, relying on objdump to dump the C source, with heavy > optimization levels and lots of inlines the code gets difficult to > read. Secondly, in particular on x86 but I guess it is not the only > one case, the sample is always attributed to the instruction directly > following the one that was interrupted. So in a C source view some > samples may be attributed to the line below the one you're interested > in. It's also important to keep in mind that if a line is a jump > target or the start of a function the sample really belongs elsewhere. > > The patch can be found here: > http://www.freebsd.org/~attilio/pmcannotate.diff/ > > where pmcannotate/ dir contains the code and needs to go under > /usr/src/usr.sbin/ and the patch has diffs against pmcstat and > Makefile. > > This work has been developed on the behalf of Nokia with important > feedbacks and directions from Jeff Roberson. > > Testing and feedbacks (before it hits the tree) are welcome. > Hi, First of all, this is excellent work. As soon as this and some other changes in PMC hit 7.x I'll be rolling this out to all the developers I work with. I've tested this on amd64 on HEAD, and with the changes we have talked about privately (%jx vs. %x) it works quite well. Secondly, I would like to request a feature. I would like to be able to get output in a more easily parsable format so I can write some Emacs code to highlight C code with the output. I'd like something along the lines of: path:function:line:percentage Keep up the good work! Later, George From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 26 08:43:24 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E30D1065675; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 08:43:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from redbull.bpaserver.net (redbullneu.bpaserver.net [213.198.78.217]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD1C78FC22; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 08:43:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from outgoing.leidinger.net (pD9E2D0E7.dip.t-dialin.net [217.226.208.231]) by redbull.bpaserver.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDFB42E13F; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 09:43:18 +0100 (CET) Received: from webmail.leidinger.net (webmail.leidinger.net [192.168.1.102]) by outgoing.leidinger.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 166AE15F41B; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 09:43:15 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=Leidinger.net; s=outgoing-alex; t=1227688995; bh=5SjEPpufO1+7YoQwYu+d/JTMRSJHhZ77q Q3oXcOVbp0=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=JQhQtgdTHgMWFZfaqhN1krD8vZHj0K8DeMJTtZPp76WoBrpIlqzgttijWz1XSd5+z XKIHzGaDhpPelPHN4L3B6NLKwoycw3uqp+Au8SRaSfABEpV8gWUvkhS2wy2GuwLtjwV EporVicz/RGaJdOyZGBgjrBRYb9RkB/4GI6frzsiUq6bWmNEiFMsBXdMNZKXfW4LlDj tYMgS7npRg4TU6JxADTkayaaYW6DJcdTonGgWW1tRY547R9br0RDpkiEuKoSDBanV4+ 7ED69zaHUHq8H8XElktNY+2CZrnfyoyvCJZga87FlnEBBDbx0ClCZSSJ4prU6IHnTkx pJ/H9vMdQ== Received: (from www@localhost) by webmail.leidinger.net (8.14.2/8.13.8/Submit) id mAQ8hEu7030905; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 09:43:14 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from pslux.cec.eu.int (pslux.cec.eu.int [158.169.9.14]) by webmail.leidinger.net (Horde Framework) with HTTP; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 09:43:14 +0100 Message-ID: <20081126094314.119834gt66jv0g00@webmail.leidinger.net> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 09:43:14 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger To: Ivan Voras References: <20081125173657.GA50429@freebsd.org> <9bbcef730811251246nf39e825s95a25ae394948e06@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <9bbcef730811251246nf39e825s95a25ae394948e06@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.3) / FreeBSD-8.0 X-BPAnet-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner-ID: BDFB42E13F.32141 X-BPAnet-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-BPAnet-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, ORDB-RBL, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-12.79, required 6, BAYES_00 -15.00, DKIM_SIGNED 0.00, DKIM_VERIFIED -0.00, FB_ALMOST_SEX 2.11, RDNS_DYNAMIC 0.10) X-BPAnet-MailScanner-From: alexander@leidinger.net X-Spam-Status: No Cc: Adrian Chadd , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 08:43:24 -0000 Quoting Ivan Voras (from Tue, 25 Nov 2008 =20 21:46:35 +0100): > 2008/11/25 Adrian Chadd : >> 2008/11/25 Ivan Voras : >> >>>> I believe most of the synthetic numbers (mp3 encoding etc.) difference >>>> comes from the different version of gcc the different OS uses... >>> >>> You're very likely right. Ubuntu 8.10 has gcc 4.3.x - it could make for >>> the small difference in gzip and 7z compression performance. >> >> Well, that should be a reasonably easy thing to test and feed back to >> the author. > > OTOH if the goal is to measure "operating system" performance, this If you want to test OS performance and use Java programs in there to =20 do so, you would use the same Java version, wouldn't you? They didn't. If you want to run some high performance java software and you want to =20 know on which OS it performs best, you would test the same Java =20 version on the OS' in question (or at least you should do that, to not =20 compare apples and oranges). If you want to run number crunching software, you are interested in =20 high computing throughput of your app, so you use a compiler which =20 performs best for your code in question (which would mean probably the =20 Intel compiler or the Portland compiler on Linux, maybe the Sun =20 compiler on Solaris, and probably gcc on FreeBSD). You also want to =20 optimize the code for your CPU (it makes a difference if you do =20 floating point calculations and are allowed to use the SSEx or =20 whatever instructions), and not some generic settings the OS comes with. The "benchmark" presented there is flawed in a lot of ways. No =20 descrition what they really want to benchmark, no description what =20 each subtest benchmarks (e.g. lame is performing on one CPU and =20 occasionally performs IO, what does this benchmark mean? That your =20 multi-CPU system is mostly idle and can be used to browse the net =20 without that you notice any impact). Only absolute numbers and no =20 relative performance comparision (percentage of difference). =20 Inconsistent starting point (not the same compiler, not the same java =20 version, ...) in case you want to promote an OS for specialized tasks =20 (there are comments which tell FreeBSD would be good for raytracing, =20 as the corresponding subtest was the fastest on FreeBSD), and so on. Did I overlook some part where they tell how they test? Do they =20 calculate the average of several runs? > must also include the compiler, libraries and all. (for example, what > does Solaris default to nowadays? I think it ships with gcc but not as > default). The hold on gcc 4.3 in FreeBSD is, after all, political > (licencing). Users most of the time don't care what the reasons are, they use what =20 is there and complain or switch if it works better somewhere else. =20 People which care about compute intense stuff, will install their =20 preferred compiler anyway. Bye, Alexander. --=20 So so is good, very good, very excellent good: and yet it is not; it is but so so. =09=09-- William Shakespeare, "As You Like It" http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID =3D 72077137 From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 26 08:49:47 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3C70106564A; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 08:49:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from markir@paradise.net.nz) Received: from smtp3.clear.net.nz (smtp3.clear.net.nz [203.97.33.64]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 885348FC1E; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 08:49:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from markir@paradise.net.nz) Received: from zmori.markir.net (121-73-168-7.dsl.telstraclear.net [121.73.168.7]) by smtp3.clear.net.nz (CLEAR Net Mail) with ESMTP id <0KAX00IWPMHV0L30@smtp3.clear.net.nz>; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 21:34:44 +1300 (NZDT) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 21:34:37 +1300 From: Mark Kirkwood In-reply-to: To: Adrian Chadd Message-id: <492D0A1D.9070602@paradise.net.nz> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit References: <200811242107.mAOL7JB9058269@lava.sentex.ca> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20081109) Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Steven Hartland , Mike Tancsa Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 08:49:47 -0000 Adrian Chadd wrote: > 2% may not sound like a lot but it starts becoming measurable savings > when the number of boxes involved is ${LARGE}. > > 2c, > > Yeah, but the margin for error in these tests is undoubtedly > 2%. AFAICS this benchmark shows that Freebsd is "up there" with these guys - slower on some, faster on some - no problem. regards Mark From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 26 09:55:41 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16CD41065673 for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 09:55:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ivoras@gmail.com) Received: from fk-out-0910.google.com (fk-out-0910.google.com [209.85.128.189]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EC638FC14 for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 09:55:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ivoras@gmail.com) Received: by fk-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id k31so369096fkk.11 for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 01:55:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender :to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references :x-google-sender-auth; bh=VUW0KLYs+6TO7zvArN8dXFj7TsFb08X+S6fxoMCqtl0=; b=LNDOY55GoWGTbSiR7x7+ZiNHvufLM334IMilLCER2Ejz8CVYWYX4FywBR88y+y1XER U7EExtfMuM0PA/Jf6wc21kk4KOYck8/ZK8v8JNmIALAdgliCcihe7VqrjruEWn7gy8u0 LIf25uccrhVzE/ZajMAciXJAtJxDfnD2bVcLU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references:x-google-sender-auth; b=lTB9vuGQJacTzPpjruutJoTSB4gGWf1BSORKzYqU0T6eslyV02RcCqbub4Cu4VdMS4 t+LQ9epyTupd4RC3ChsML/4a7BvwExe1n8fTzSqAK4gUfAVSRv+tYOtqGcM9uEEYoxcg ZM4D3XPU+JeS0kkT+/OvVvB4OmcGT0tr842NY= Received: by 10.181.218.14 with SMTP id v14mr1885548bkq.111.1227693339156; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 01:55:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.181.49.2 with HTTP; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 01:55:39 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <9bbcef730811260155h156b7a6v8c88b0da51f28ee@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 10:55:39 +0100 From: "Ivan Voras" Sender: ivoras@gmail.com To: "Alexander Leidinger" In-Reply-To: <20081126094314.119834gt66jv0g00@webmail.leidinger.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20081125173657.GA50429@freebsd.org> <9bbcef730811251246nf39e825s95a25ae394948e06@mail.gmail.com> <20081126094314.119834gt66jv0g00@webmail.leidinger.net> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 898ce488b1781071 Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 09:55:42 -0000 2008/11/26 Alexander Leidinger : > If you want to test OS performance and use Java programs in there to do so, > you would use the same Java version, wouldn't you? They didn't. Linux: 1.6.0_0-b12 Solaris: 1.6.0_10-b33 FreeBSD: 1.6.0_07-b02 Since system have their local patches (I know FreeBSD does), I don't think it's even possible to test "exactly the same" version ;) But this also goes into the "What OS ships with" category. > If you want to run number crunching software, you are interested in high > computing throughput of your app, so you use a compiler which performs best > for your code in question (which would mean probably the Intel compiler or > the Portland compiler on Linux, maybe the Sun compiler on Solaris, and > probably gcc on FreeBSD). You also want to optimize the code for your CPU > (it makes a difference if you do floating point calculations and are allowed > to use the SSEx or whatever instructions), and not some generic settings the > OS comes with. I think they went with the "stock" configurations as that's what almost all users will use. > The "benchmark" presented there is flawed in a lot of ways. Yes. From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 26 12:18:31 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09B1C1065672; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 12:18:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from redbull.bpaserver.net (redbullneu.bpaserver.net [213.198.78.217]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ED078FC1A; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 12:18:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from outgoing.leidinger.net (pD9E2CF3A.dip.t-dialin.net [217.226.207.58]) by redbull.bpaserver.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 080342E0E2; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:18:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from webmail.leidinger.net (webmail.leidinger.net [192.168.1.102]) by outgoing.leidinger.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA1455F2; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:18:14 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=Leidinger.net; s=outgoing-alex; t=1227701894; bh=J6qYJ54uqf56bNtn57g1ygkB06sMC8y2s 02y8V24I4k=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References: In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=jWDskiH1bDk07IyTgEvaR+3Qz4zd1qwNBbnxVJI4XfEC2kllBKBVZXGEryPGJUlqk BbZlcHMDnF02LYLwlCWl/7iLasOoPYJjwWyLvC/2c9Bt/6tSdktXpuQ3uOKdSQjUBOv DBczEDEIkQW0ksIACQ6F1GMoCRkgu+TUGnf0fjqEl/K3shSVLWte+fLXE4SHaTcu2Gg xhX5Xg1EaZtQ1i9+SHyDMucS7YxzbUi23Vw8M+Eydi1FeNlikBBKrmXOzo8LIqbIdAQ 6GYSxeWnGIGmHXsjqTJSO3eP4q2m+0b8mBgDJkzokvsvt1Bdc5oscptDvxfxd0eLVjZ 1ITVCi9rA== Received: (from www@localhost) by webmail.leidinger.net (8.14.2/8.13.8/Submit) id mAQCIE1A007498; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:18:14 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from pslux.cec.eu.int (pslux.cec.eu.int [158.169.9.14]) by webmail.leidinger.net (Horde Framework) with HTTP; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:18:14 +0100 Message-ID: <20081126131814.21221p9o7j3rryjo@webmail.leidinger.net> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:18:14 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger To: Ivan Voras References: <20081125173657.GA50429@freebsd.org> <9bbcef730811251246nf39e825s95a25ae394948e06@mail.gmail.com> <20081126094314.119834gt66jv0g00@webmail.leidinger.net> <9bbcef730811260155h156b7a6v8c88b0da51f28ee@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <9bbcef730811260155h156b7a6v8c88b0da51f28ee@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.3) / FreeBSD-8.0 X-BPAnet-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner-ID: 080342E0E2.362F1 X-BPAnet-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-BPAnet-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, ORDB-RBL, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-11.894, required 6, BAYES_00 -15.00, DKIM_SIGNED 0.00, DKIM_VERIFIED -0.00, FB_ALMOST_SEX 2.11, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE 1.40, RDNS_DYNAMIC 0.10, SMILEY -0.50) X-BPAnet-MailScanner-From: alexander@leidinger.net X-Spam-Status: No Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 12:18:31 -0000 Quoting Ivan Voras (from Wed, 26 Nov 2008 =20 10:55:39 +0100): > 2008/11/26 Alexander Leidinger : > >> If you want to test OS performance and use Java programs in there to do s= o, >> you would use the same Java version, wouldn't you? They didn't. > > Linux: 1.6.0_0-b12 > Solaris: 1.6.0_10-b33 > FreeBSD: 1.6.0_07-b02 The important part is the _XX, not the -bYY. The bYY may be something =20 we don't care about, but the _XX part is something which may cause =20 performance differences. > Since system have their local patches (I know FreeBSD does), I don't > think it's even possible to test "exactly the same" version ;) > > But this also goes into the "What OS ships with" category. We don't ship with java at all... strictly speaking. ;) >> If you want to run number crunching software, you are interested in high >> computing throughput of your app, so you use a compiler which performs be= st >> for your code in question (which would mean probably the Intel compiler o= r >> the Portland compiler on Linux, maybe the Sun compiler on Solaris, and >> probably gcc on FreeBSD). You also want to optimize the code for your CPU >> (it makes a difference if you do floating point calculations and are allo= wed >> to use the SSEx or whatever instructions), and not some generic settings = the >> OS comes with. > > I think they went with the "stock" configurations as that's what > almost all users will use. I fully agree. But number crunching (as benchmarked, and I'm not =20 talking about LAME which has a 2% difference) is not something almost =20 all users will do. Something the masses may do with the OS is not =20 covered at all, no browser tests, no interactivity (maybe with high =20 load in the background) tests. As I said, they don't even tell what =20 they want to test (and as such, everything we can do is speculate... =20 that's not something which will lead to interesting results in the =20 thread). Bye, Alexander. --=20 Man must shape his tools lest they shape him. =09=09-- Arthur R. Miller http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID =3D 72077137 From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 26 12:36:19 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF5CF1065670; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 12:36:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de) Received: from outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de (outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de [130.133.4.66]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DAD68FC19; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 12:36:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de) Received: from inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de ([130.133.4.69]) by outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.69) with esmtp (envelope-from ) id <1L5JO0-0004bX-9s>; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:20:52 +0100 Received: from telesto.geoinf.fu-berlin.de ([130.133.86.198]) by inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.69) with esmtpsa (envelope-from ) id <1L5JO0-0002wi-8m>; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:20:52 +0100 Message-ID: <492D3E95.1000106@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 12:18:29 +0000 From: "O. Hartmann" Organization: Freie =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Universit=E4t_Berlin?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081124) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ivan Voras References: <20081125173657.GA50429@freebsd.org> <9bbcef730811251246nf39e825s95a25ae394948e06@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <9bbcef730811251246nf39e825s95a25ae394948e06@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: 130.133.86.198 Cc: Adrian Chadd , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 12:36:20 -0000 Ivan Voras wrote: ... > > OTOH if the goal is to measure "operating system" performance, this > must also include the compiler, libraries and all. (for example, what > does Solaris default to nowadays? I think it ships with gcc but not as > default). The hold on gcc 4.3 in FreeBSD is, after all, political > (licencing). This is very bad to read :-( Many of my colleaugues are involved in HPC, very little of them (including myself) utilizing FreeBSD even due to the lack of fast compilers. Yes, we all can use the port, that is right, but for those not so familiar and deep inside the underlying OS, with newer, better hardware (CPUs with some interesting hardware features like SSE3/4) a on-track-following compiler like GCC 4.3 could make use of special features introduced in newer hardware and even due to better optimizations compile a faster OS. And the result, even in 3% or 5% performance gain is appreciated if model-runs taking days or weeks! Regards, Oliver > > If FreeBSD base ever switches to LLVM+clang, this means libc will be > compiled with a non-gcc compiler which will forever change the > performance for simple "real world" benchmarks. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 26 14:03:54 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CFE9106564A for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 14:03:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gofp-freebsd-performance@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 116068FC1F for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 14:03:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gofp-freebsd-performance@m.gmane.org) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1L5Kzf-0008Rl-Pd for freebsd-performance@freebsd.org; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 14:03:51 +0000 Received: from lara.cc.fer.hr ([161.53.72.113]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 14:03:51 +0000 Received: from ivoras by lara.cc.fer.hr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 14:03:51 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org From: Ivan Voras Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 15:03:45 +0100 Lines: 55 Message-ID: References: <20081125173657.GA50429@freebsd.org> <9bbcef730811251246nf39e825s95a25ae394948e06@mail.gmail.com> <492D3E95.1000106@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigBF71FDAA7141E17FA2FEAC91" X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: lara.cc.fer.hr User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20080925) In-Reply-To: <492D3E95.1000106@zedat.fu-berlin.de> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 Sender: news Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 14:03:54 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigBF71FDAA7141E17FA2FEAC91 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable O. Hartmann wrote: > Ivan Voras wrote: > ... >=20 >> >> OTOH if the goal is to measure "operating system" performance, this >> must also include the compiler, libraries and all. (for example, what >> does Solaris default to nowadays? I think it ships with gcc but not as= >> default). The hold on gcc 4.3 in FreeBSD is, after all, political >> (licencing). >=20 > This is very bad to read :-( I agree. GPL 3 is a bit hard on the non-GPL systems (i.e. harder than GPL 2). > Many of my colleaugues are involved in HPC, very little of them > (including myself) utilizing FreeBSD even due to the lack of fast > compilers. Yes, we all can use the port, that is right, but for those > not so familiar and deep inside the underlying OS, with newer, better > hardware (CPUs with some interesting hardware features like SSE3/4) a > on-track-following compiler like GCC 4.3 could make use of special > features introduced in newer hardware and even due to better > optimizations compile a faster OS. And the result, even in 3% or 5% > performance gain is appreciated if model-runs taking days or weeks! AFAIK, gcc 4.3+ will always be available in the ports so users that need it will always have it available (it's available there now!). It's just that the base compiler will either stay 4.2, switch to something else (Roman Divacky is working on LLVM+clang), or bite the bullet (with possible workarounds for undesireable parts of GPL3) and switch to a newer gcc. --------------enigBF71FDAA7141E17FA2FEAC91 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJLVdBldnAQVacBcgRAm/RAJ4z/DK2fROVDf8HDpmLRe9utleMogCgkmO+ sJHc0HAq6J+IKOzYbg++TcE= =8a1m -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigBF71FDAA7141E17FA2FEAC91-- From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 26 16:23:03 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18BA41065679; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:23:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@lor.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: from lor.one-eyed-alien.net (cl-162.ewr-01.us.sixxs.net [IPv6:2001:4830:1200:a1::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BBD88FC18; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:23:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@lor.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: from lor.one-eyed-alien.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lor.one-eyed-alien.net (8.14.3/8.14.2) with ESMTP id mAQGNmux081839; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 10:23:48 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from brooks@lor.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: (from brooks@localhost) by lor.one-eyed-alien.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id mAQGNmb4081838; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 10:23:48 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from brooks) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 10:23:48 -0600 From: Brooks Davis To: Ivan Voras Message-ID: <20081126162347.GA81416@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> References: <20081125173657.GA50429@freebsd.org> <9bbcef730811251246nf39e825s95a25ae394948e06@mail.gmail.com> <492D3E95.1000106@zedat.fu-berlin.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="/9DWx/yDrRhgMJTb" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (lor.one-eyed-alien.net [127.0.0.1]); Wed, 26 Nov 2008 10:23:48 -0600 (CST) Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:23:03 -0000 --/9DWx/yDrRhgMJTb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 03:03:45PM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote: > O. Hartmann wrote: > > Ivan Voras wrote: > > ... > >=20 > >> > >> OTOH if the goal is to measure "operating system" performance, this > >> must also include the compiler, libraries and all. (for example, what > >> does Solaris default to nowadays? I think it ships with gcc but not as > >> default). The hold on gcc 4.3 in FreeBSD is, after all, political > >> (licencing). > >=20 > > This is very bad to read :-( >=20 > I agree. GPL 3 is a bit hard on the non-GPL systems (i.e. harder than > GPL 2). There are several things people can do to mitigate the issues here. They can work to make it easier to completely replace the base compiler with a port. It seems not unlikely that FreeBSD distributions like PC-BSD will eventually do this. They can track GCC enhancements and when those enhancements are actually compelling make a case for an upgrade. We haven't closed the door on that possibility, but the bar is quite high given the number of FreeBSD customers who have a "no GPLv3 source in house, no exceptions!" policy. They can work on LLVM support and integration. Apple is putting a lot of effort into both llvm-gcc and clang. From the outside, it looks like they consider that their future. As such, it may well be ours. -- Brooks --/9DWx/yDrRhgMJTb Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFJLXgTXY6L6fI4GtQRAisOAJ0REwL5o3cQseRNQLHa2JMM9RVnrACfYZFe f5ZD+S7toIMyZ6UrnCAtqoI= =da1t -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --/9DWx/yDrRhgMJTb-- From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 26 20:57:42 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F56F1065674; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 20:57:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rdivacky@lev.vlakno.cz) Received: from vlakno.cz (77-93-215-190.static.masterinter.net [77.93.215.190]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCE498FC0A; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 20:57:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rdivacky@lev.vlakno.cz) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vlakno.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id D25019CB27A; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 21:53:17 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at vlakno.cz Received: from vlakno.cz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (lev.vlakno.cz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wlBujeqPq8Qu; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 21:53:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from lev.vlakno.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vlakno.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 795929CB769; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 21:53:15 +0100 (CET) Received: (from rdivacky@localhost) by lev.vlakno.cz (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id mAQKrFNb007218; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 21:53:15 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from rdivacky) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 21:53:15 +0100 From: Roman Divacky To: Brooks Davis Message-ID: <20081126205315.GA6950@freebsd.org> References: <20081125173657.GA50429@freebsd.org> <9bbcef730811251246nf39e825s95a25ae394948e06@mail.gmail.com> <492D3E95.1000106@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <20081126162347.GA81416@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081126162347.GA81416@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, Ivan Voras Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 20:57:42 -0000 > They can work on LLVM support and integration. Apple is putting a lot > of effort into both llvm-gcc and clang. From the outside, it looks like > they consider that their future. As such, it may well be ours. I am doing some work on llvm+clang, it's still not very mature but looks very promising.... if you are interested contact me :) roman From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 27 10:20:29 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB4231065670 for ; Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:20:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from joel@FreeBSD.org) Received: from garland.euromail.se (imsc1.euromail.se [217.174.79.93]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2ACA98FC16 for ; Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:20:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from joel@FreeBSD.org) Received: from (unknown [217.174.79.67]) by garland.euromail.se with smtp id 362e_566d6fd6_bc64_11dd_a5e3_00188b3329be; Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:18:22 +0100 Received: from tyler.emailprod.vodafone.se ([192.168.106.59]) by waters.emailprod.vodafone.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:18:22 +0100 Received: from hackbook.local ([79.102.215.244]) by tyler.emailprod.vodafone.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:18:21 +0100 Message-ID: <492E65CC.2060900@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:18:04 +0100 From: Joel Dahl User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (Macintosh/20081105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ivan Voras References: <20081125173657.GA50429@freebsd.org> <9bbcef730811251246nf39e825s95a25ae394948e06@mail.gmail.com> <492D3E95.1000106@zedat.fu-berlin.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Nov 2008 09:18:21.0844 (UTC) FILETIME=[17D9B540:01C95071] X-NAI-Spam-Level: * X-NAI-Spam-Score: 1 X-NAI-Spam-Report: 2 Rules triggered * 1 -- RCVD_DOT_NAME -- Suspect machine name in the received header * 0 -- RV3156 -- BODY: Version number Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:20:29 -0000 Ivan Voras skrev: > O. Hartmann wrote: >> Ivan Voras wrote: >> ... >> >>> OTOH if the goal is to measure "operating system" performance, this >>> must also include the compiler, libraries and all. (for example, what >>> does Solaris default to nowadays? I think it ships with gcc but not as >>> default). The hold on gcc 4.3 in FreeBSD is, after all, political >>> (licencing). >> This is very bad to read :-( > > I agree. GPL 3 is a bit hard on the non-GPL systems (i.e. harder than > GPL 2). > >> Many of my colleaugues are involved in HPC, very little of them >> (including myself) utilizing FreeBSD even due to the lack of fast >> compilers. Yes, we all can use the port, that is right, but for those >> not so familiar and deep inside the underlying OS, with newer, better >> hardware (CPUs with some interesting hardware features like SSE3/4) a >> on-track-following compiler like GCC 4.3 could make use of special >> features introduced in newer hardware and even due to better >> optimizations compile a faster OS. And the result, even in 3% or 5% >> performance gain is appreciated if model-runs taking days or weeks! > > AFAIK, gcc 4.3+ will always be available in the ports so users that need > it will always have it available (it's available there now!). It's just > that the base compiler will either stay 4.2, switch to something else Some of us are still hoping that PCC will be a viable option in the future, especially now that development has picked up again. It has a BSD-style license: http://pcc.ludd.ltu.se/ There's also an ongoing fundraiser for PCC development (in order to bring it to 1.0 release status): http://www.bsdfund.org/projects/pcc/ -- Joel From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 28 06:15:03 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 522D51065670 for ; Fri, 28 Nov 2008 06:15:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from kennaway-macbookpro.local (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0922E8FC19; Fri, 28 Nov 2008 06:15:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <492F8C64.7020509@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 22:15:00 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (Macintosh/20081105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Laurent Frigault References: <20081121170643.GA41695@troll.free.org> In-Reply-To: <20081121170643.GA41695@troll.free.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: hwpmc / high resolution profiling kernel X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 06:15:03 -0000 Laurent Frigault wrote: > Hi, > > I try to use hwpmc to find a net/lagg performance problem on a DELL > poweredge 2950 with dual E5440 (AMD64 7.1-PRERELEASE form yesterday) , > but it seems that those processor are not recognized by hwpmc . > Is there a known fix / work arround ? Support has recently been added in 8.0. Hopefully it will be back-ported soon. Kris From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 28 17:24:01 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1A111065675; Fri, 28 Nov 2008 17:24:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from proxy.meer.net (proxy.meer.net [64.13.141.13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3EE98FC0A; Fri, 28 Nov 2008 17:24:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from mail.meer.net (mail.meer.net [64.13.141.3]) by proxy.meer.net (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id mASHO1Ct076545; Fri, 28 Nov 2008 09:24:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from mail2.meer.net (mail2.meer.net [64.13.141.16]) by mail.meer.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/meer) with ESMTP id mASHNEb7031028; Fri, 28 Nov 2008 09:23:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from minion.local.neville-neil.com (209.249.190.254.available.above.net [209.249.190.254] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by mail2.meer.net (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id mASHNDZX046524; Fri, 28 Nov 2008 09:23:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 12:23:13 -0500 Message-ID: From: gnn@freebsd.org To: Kris Kennaway In-Reply-To: <492F8C64.7020509@FreeBSD.org> References: <20081121170643.GA41695@troll.free.org> <492F8C64.7020509@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.5 (Almost Unreal) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.9 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Goj=F2?=) APEL/10.7 Emacs/22.3 (i386-apple-darwin9.5.0) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Canit-CHI2: 0.50 X-Bayes-Prob: 0.5 (Score 0, tokens from: ) X-Spam-Score: 0.10 () [Tag at 5.00] COMBINED_FROM X-CanItPRO-Stream: default X-Canit-Stats-ID: 2433993 - d8db724cd1f1 X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . roaringpenguin . com) on 64.13.141.13 Cc: Laurent Frigault , freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: hwpmc / high resolution profiling kernel X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 17:24:02 -0000 At Thu, 27 Nov 2008 22:15:00 -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > Laurent Frigault wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I try to use hwpmc to find a net/lagg performance problem on a DELL > > poweredge 2950 with dual E5440 (AMD64 7.1-PRERELEASE form yesterday) , > > but it seems that those processor are not recognized by hwpmc . > > Is there a known fix / work arround ? > > Support has recently been added in 8.0. Hopefully it will be > back-ported soon. > I am testing a patch presently for the latest hwpmc in 7.x Best, George