From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 21 18:13:40 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60ADF6B4; Sat, 21 Mar 2015 18:13:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smarthost1.sentex.ca (smarthost1.sentex.ca [IPv6:2607:f3e0:0:1::12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "smarthost.sentex.ca", Issuer "smarthost.sentex.ca" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05584755; Sat, 21 Mar 2015 18:13:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [IPv6:2607:f3e0:0:4:f025:8813:7603:7e4a] (saphire3.sentex.ca [IPv6:2607:f3e0:0:4:f025:8813:7603:7e4a]) by smarthost1.sentex.ca (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t2LIDUMC043926; Sat, 21 Mar 2015 14:13:30 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Message-ID: <550DB4B2.7080603@sentex.net> Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2015 14:13:06 -0400 From: Mike Tancsa Organization: Sentex Communications User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Baldwin , Konstantin Belousov , d@delphij.net Subject: Re: RELENG_10 performance regression (was Re: 35-40% performance drop releng9 vs releng10 openvpn References: <5506250A.2000506@sentex.net> <20150316132055.GQ32288@funkthat.com> <5509D6C6.4050204@sentex.net> <20150318211457.GL51048@funkthat.com> <550B6950.8060806@sentex.net> <550C5AAF.9060502@sentex.net> <550C8AEE.4090408@sentex.net> <550CB306.7030405@delphij.net> <20150321001559.GB2379@kib.kiev.ua> <550CBF80.6030809@sentex.net> <550D93C7.9080709@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <550D93C7.9080709@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.75 Cc: John-Mark Gurney , FreeBSD-STABLE Mailing List X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2015 18:13:40 -0000 On 3/21/2015 11:52 AM, John Baldwin wrote: >> http://tancsa.com/time/ > > Do you know why you are using the HPET instead of TSC for timestamping? Hi, I am not consciously making any time keep decisions. kern.eventtimer.choice: HPET(550) HPET1(450) LAPIC(400) i8254(100) RTC(0) kern.timecounter.choice: TSC(800) HPET(950) ACPI-fast(900) i8254(0) dummy(-1000000) (The full hardware info is at the above url) > Using the TSC can make a non-trivial performance difference since userland > can calculate timestamps without using system calls when it is used. > (That is not related to this case, but switching to the TSC in general is > preferable.) > > There are a few generations of Intel CPUs where you can't mix deeper sleep > states with the TSC as timecounter, but those CPUs are getting to be a bit > older at this point. > This one is an AMD CPU: AMD G-T40E Processor (1000.02-MHz K8-class CPU) Origin="AuthenticAMD" Id=0x500f20 Family=0x14 Model=0x2 Stepping=0 Features=0x178bfbff Features2=0x802209 AMD Features=0x2e500800 AMD Features2=0x35ff SVM: NP,NRIP,NAsids=8 TSC: P-state invariant, performance statistics real memory = 2115297280 (2017 MB) avail memory = 2018639872 (1925 MB) Event timer "LAPIC" quality 400 ACPI APIC Table: FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 2 CPUs FreeBSD/SMP: 1 package(s) x 2 core(s) cpu0 (BSP): APIC ID: 0 cpu1 (AP): APIC ID: 1 ioapic0 irqs 0-23 on motherboard random: initialized module_register_init: MOD_LOAD (vesa, 0xffffffff80d9ddf0, 0) error 19 kbd0 at kbdmux0 acpi0: on motherboard acpi0: Power Button (fixed) cpu0: on acpi0 cpu1: on acpi0 -- ------------------- Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400 Sentex Communications, mike@sentex.net Providing Internet services since 1994 www.sentex.net Cambridge, Ontario Canada http://www.tancsa.com/