Cedric Le Goater wrote: > Pavel Emelianov wrote: >> Serge E. Hallyn wrote: >>> Quoting Kirill Korotaev (dev@xxxxx): >>>> Cedric, >>>> >>>> just a small note. >>>> imho it is not correct to check performance with enabled debug in memory allocator >>>> since it can influence cache efficiency much. >>>> In you case looks like you have DEBUG_SLAB enabled. >>> Hm, good point. Cedric, did you ever run any tests with profiling and >>> debugging turned off? >> I'd like to add that the results-for-comparison have to be run >> with profiler turned off. Further, if we need to know what the >> bottleneck is, the profiler is on, but the numbers get are not >> trusted. >> >> Cedric, may I ask you to rerun the tests with both the debug and >> the profiler turned off and report the results again? > > sure. let me do all debug=off first because i'm interested in some > figures. Just to be sure. When I tested the namespaces I made the node clean from any daemon that could spoil the results and made the cache hot for the files involved in testing. Otherwise the results could have more than 5% of accuracy which is not enough... > so what do you think of the nptl perf benchmark to evaluate our > progress ? If this is just a spawn test for threads, then I think this is not enough. This test *is* important, but we have to check some more issues when talking about the namespaces. I will look at this test closer tomorrow for more competent answer. > C. Thanks, Pavel _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
