From owner-freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 4 09:37:25 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B198F74B; Tue, 4 Jun 2013 09:37:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from zbb@semihalf.com) Received: from smtp.semihalf.com (smtp.semihalf.com [213.17.239.109]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 688C516D3; Tue, 4 Jun 2013 09:37:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [213.17.239.109]) by smtp.semihalf.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8057CEFC70; Tue, 4 Jun 2013 11:37:18 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at semihalf.com Received: from smtp.semihalf.com ([213.17.239.109]) by localhost (smtp.semihalf.com [213.17.239.109]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SSNWPmk+Y6wY; Tue, 4 Jun 2013 11:37:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [10.0.2.117] (cardhu.semihalf.com [213.17.239.108]) by smtp.semihalf.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CDF6CEFC47; Tue, 4 Jun 2013 11:37:17 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <51ADB54C.300@semihalf.com> Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2013 11:37:16 +0200 From: Zbyszek Bodek User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan Cox Subject: Re: pmap_copy for ARMv6/v7 References: <51A78BF5.5000901@rice.edu> In-Reply-To: <51A78BF5.5000901@rice.edu> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org, Alan Cox , Aleksandr Rybalko X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the StrongARM Processor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2013 09:37:25 -0000 On 30.05.2013 19:27, Alan Cox wrote: > On 05/28/2013 17:17, Zbigniew Bodek wrote: >> Hello Everyone, >> >> I would like to share with you the patch adding pmap_copy() >> functionality to pmap-v6.c. This is the last but not least of >> the pmap improvements done as a part of Semihalf work on >> Superpages support. >> >> We tried various technics to test the patch on our target. >> Apart from obvious long term stability tests and others, >> we used a simple benchmark to measure fork system call time and overhead. >> >> The program can be downloaded from here: >> http://berlin.ccc.de/~packet/fork_test.c >> >> A single fork time has increased as suspected (the program is not measuring >> a real-life fork situation where child process is actually doing something) >> but the average system overhead has decreased. >> For 10000 fork(), 10000 vfork() and 10000 pthread_create() calls we observe >> 100000 less vm_faults and shorter overall test time. >> >> If you have any suggestions or have an idea for benchmarking this >> feature please share. > > > From what you describe above, I think that you've done a reasonable job > of testing. The performance results are in line with what I would > expect. I wouldn't worry too much about obtaining further test results. > > >> We will appreciate if you could test this patch on your ARM platforms and >> send >> us your review/feedback. >> > > > The patch looks fine. > > Alan Hello Alan, Thank you very much for your review. Patch has just been committed to FreeBSD HEAD: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=251370 Best regards Zbyszek Bodek