From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Jan  5 20:48:00 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74FF553E;
 Sat,  5 Jan 2013 20:48:00 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com)
Received: from mail-wg0-f52.google.com (mail-wg0-f52.google.com [74.125.82.52])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5605216;
 Sat,  5 Jan 2013 20:47:59 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-wg0-f52.google.com with SMTP id 12so8627014wgh.7
 for <multiple recipients>; Sat, 05 Jan 2013 12:47:52 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
 :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
 bh=MSfYL1taI9rpqOnW8s7oZviBUHEDkqonM694p53e2ss=;
 b=CWGVSEskKv2+FOh0m34XDf9LyHFlAc1YqWEdapsLmk9D+8MpFKegsm/c7VL9apK+ZO
 uXwnErWaRsr4P97B982QA4SPUXrdotaRVTcS6YI3Ca2Bik4TvAmzTcJ/7p60j8Oe7rUN
 8TaipQYjQTTIPQxvy21ef+jL6Isli+6IOugiEnOLugwdNw8dMekGUrE5Defd2TdQyDXK
 gJj6LRB+sJ3Tm62JLpFovYjyZ0uz/JvxRVFj89GM4IpHobyuOb7FByeo+90evhUk2630
 Qu6bWW4VihJTSkWRnAV5d4EqTS2Pb6clu1SQ5yda/iatdaymW/isxmb0X+yYiEH5WWGs
 2zAg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.93.133 with SMTP id cu5mr3046504wib.32.1357418872388;
 Sat, 05 Jan 2013 12:47:52 -0800 (PST)
Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com
Received: by 10.217.57.9 with HTTP; Sat, 5 Jan 2013 12:47:52 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CA+zcas1V0KzcBKjq1u3Rwu_Nm7hVkG+G+eHpHRDQG0_NcXoOWA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+zcas1V0KzcBKjq1u3Rwu_Nm7hVkG+G+eHpHRDQG0_NcXoOWA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2013 12:47:52 -0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: ONohT-lvtfDspYvOlGj6uhoWIaQ
Message-ID: <CAJ-Vmo=O9v==Xpm8F2UUjkEAOaHbKydLMpn6Bz-5rRBt+2TEAg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: L1 cache thrashing affects performance of HIMENO benchmark
From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
To: Hakisho Nukama <nukama@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Jason Evans <jasone@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
 <freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-hackers>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2013 20:48:00 -0000

I've CC'ed jasone on this as it's an interesting side-effect of memory
allocation logic.

Jason - any comments?



Adrian

On 5 January 2013 07:38, Hakisho Nukama <nukama@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> FreeBSD (PCBSD) is slower compared to Linux and kFreeBSD in this
> benchmark of HIMENO:
> http://openbenchmarking.org/prospect/1202215-BY-FREEBSD9683/88ac7a01c6cb355d7e7603224b2ee1e5a4cb881d
> Also DragonFly BSD compares worse to kFreeBSD and Linux:
> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=dragonfly_linux_32&num=3
> http://openbenchmarking.org/prospect/1206255-SU-DRAGONFLY55/88ac7a01c6cb355d7e7603224b2ee1e5a4cb881d
>
> Matt, Venkatesh and Alex investigated this performance problem and
> came to these results:
> http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/mailarchive/users/2013-01/msg00011.html
>
> Best Regards,
> Hakisho Nukama
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"