From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 6 06:22:38 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E43E106564A for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 06:22:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from out-0.mx.aerioconnect.net (outd.internet-mail-service.net [216.240.47.227]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C3AB8FC08 for ; Mon, 6 Dec 2010 06:22:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from idiom.com (postfix@mx0.idiom.com [216.240.32.160]) by out-0.mx.aerioconnect.net (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oB66MbR4024029; Sun, 5 Dec 2010 22:22:37 -0800 X-Client-Authorized: MaGic Cook1e X-Client-Authorized: MaGic Cook1e X-Client-Authorized: MaGic Cook1e Received: from julian-mac.elischer.org (h-67-100-89-137.snfccasy.static.covad.net [67.100.89.137]) by idiom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 291312D6014; Sun, 5 Dec 2010 22:22:35 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4CFC812B.9060505@freebsd.org> Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2010 22:22:35 -0800 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X 10.4; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Garrett Cooper References: <20101205231829.GA68156@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <4CFC27A0.8000406@freebsd.org> <20101206061230.GA69477@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.67 on 216.240.47.51 Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Steve Kargl Subject: Re: Process accounting/timing has broken recently X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 06:22:38 -0000 On 12/5/10 10:19 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 10:12 PM, Steve Kargl > wrote: >> On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 04:00:32PM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: >>> On 12/5/10 3:18 PM, Steve Kargl wrote: >>>> Sometime in the last 7-10 days, some one made a >>>> change that has broken process accounting/timing. >>>> >>>> laptop:kargl[42] foreach i ( 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ) >>>> foreach? time ./testf >>>> foreach? end >>>> Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 >>>> 69.55 real 38.39 user 30.94 sys >>>> Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 >>>> 68.82 real 40.95 user 27.60 sys >>>> Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 >>>> 69.14 real 38.90 user 30.02 sys >>>> Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 >>>> 68.79 real 40.59 user 27.99 sys >>>> Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 >>>> 68.93 real 39.76 user 28.96 sys >>>> Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 >>>> 68.71 real 41.21 user 27.29 sys >>>> Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 >>>> 69.05 real 39.68 user 29.15 sys >>>> Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 >>>> 68.99 real 39.98 user 28.80 sys >>>> Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 >>>> 69.02 real 39.64 user 29.16 sys >>>> Max ULP: 0.501607 for x in [-18.000000:88.709999] with dx = 1.067100e-04 >>>> 69.38 real 37.49 user 31.67 sys >>>> >>>> testf is a numerically intensive program that tests the >>>> accuracy of expf() in a tight loop. User time varies >>>> by ~3 seconds on my lightly loaded 2 GHz core2 duo processor. >>>> I'm fairly certain that the code does not suddenly grow/loose >>>> 6 GFLOP of operations. >>>> >>> I know it's a lot to ask but it may be something that you can help >>> with if you >>> had the time to triangulate in on the change that did it.. >>> I presume that since you are an "old hand" you can check out sources >>> at different revisions.. >> I was hoping that someone (possibly the person responsible) would >> recognize the symptoms and recommend a revision or two to revert. >> Otherwise, doing a binary search will take some time in that it >> takes 4+ hours for a buildworld/kernel cycle on my laptop. > If you can provide the source for the application you're running > above and instructions on how to compile it, I can at least give you a > bit of a head start :). > Thanks, > -Garrett > plus which probably just `cd /sys/amd64/conf config GENERIC;cd ../compile/GENERIC; make kernel` would be enough...