From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Oct 20 12:42:54 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E588B1065672
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue, 20 Oct 2009 12:42:54 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from freebsd-hackers@m.gmane.org)
Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2FFC8FC16
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue, 20 Oct 2009 12:42:54 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1N0E31-000652-G3
	for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:42:43 +0200
Received: from lara.cc.fer.hr ([161.53.72.113])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
	id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:42:43 +0200
Received: from ivoras by lara.cc.fer.hr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
	id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:42:43 +0200
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:42:17 +0200
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <hbkb79$7l2$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <20091020122432.GA50817@ravenloft.kiev.ua>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: lara.cc.fer.hr
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090928)
In-Reply-To: <20091020122432.GA50817@ravenloft.kiev.ua>
Sender: news <news@ger.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: Make process title - % complete
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 12:42:55 -0000

Alex Kozlov wrote:

> Of course ps or top output much more convenient, but if setproctitle so
> expencive and will be called so often, then SIGINFO may be good
> compromise. 

Regarding speed of setproctitle(), here are some microbenchmark results 
from the attached test source:

getpid: 3661124.75 iterations/s
setproctitle: 591357.56 iterations/s

Meaning, setprocitle() is around 6 times more expensive than getpid(), 
meaning it can only be pulled off nearly 600,000 calls/s on a 2.3 GHz 
Core 2 CPU.

I really want to be enlightened about how it could affect wallclock time 
in make(1).

----

#include <sys/time.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <unistd.h>

#define NITER 1e7

double now() {
	struct timeval tp;
	gettimeofday(&tp, NULL);
	return tp.tv_sec + (double)tp.tv_usec / 1e6f;
}

int main() {
	double t1, t2, t3;
	int i;

	t1 = now();
	for (i = 0; i < NITER; i++)
		getpid();
	t2 = now() - t1;

	printf("getpid: %0.2f iterations/s\n", (float)(NITER/t2));

	t1 = now();
	for (i = 0; i < NITER; i++)
		setproctitle("t%d", i);
	t3 = now() - t1;

	printf("setproctitle: %0.2f iterations/s\n", (float)(NITER/t3));
}