From owner-freebsd-current Fri Jun 15 17: 9:57 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from technokratis.com (modemcable052.174-202-24.mtl.mc.videotron.ca [24.202.174.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F38D37B401; Fri, 15 Jun 2001 17:09:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bmilekic@technokratis.com) Received: (from bmilekic@localhost) by technokratis.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f5G0ANr01784; Fri, 15 Jun 2001 20:10:23 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from bmilekic) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 20:10:23 -0400 From: Bosko Milekic To: Jonathan Lemon Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, terry@FreeBSD.ORG, rwatson@FreeBSD.ORG, jlemon@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: New Mbuf Allocator (some graphs) Message-ID: <20010615201023.A1759@technokratis.com> References: <20010615185421.A1179@technokratis.com> <20010615183255.C68883@prism.flugsvamp.com> <20010615194459.A1549@technokratis.com> <20010615185529.D68883@prism.flugsvamp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20010615185529.D68883@prism.flugsvamp.com>; from jlemon@flugsvamp.com on Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 06:55:29PM -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 06:55:29PM -0500, Jonathan Lemon wrote: > > In any case, the mb_alloc code you used still has the malloc() and > > free() calls during cluster allocation and freeing and still, it looks to > > me as very comparable nonetheless. > > The results look good to me; the only thing that really stands out > is the signature graph for stream tests; that odd curve at the start > of the run. However, if I'm interpreting it correctly, it shows > better performance in the mb_alloc case. Oh yeah, they're certainly decent, especially given that we're under Giant. Remember that the scalability should come into play only when Giant is unzipped, and then there is space for improvement. For me, all that matters is that there is no significant degradation at this point, because the new allocator has another significant advantage over the old one: possibility of resource reclamation. As for the `bulge' it is likely related to the fact that your old allocator code may not be configured to pre-allocate enough mbufs and/or clusters so it's stuck fetching from the map. But, in any case, although mb_alloc does show to be slightly better here, keep in mind that the x-axis is logarithmically scaled, so the difference is rather minimal. > -- > Jonathan Cheers, -- Bosko Milekic bmilekic@technokratis.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message