Ingo Molnar wrote:
actually, the pure marker overhead seems to be a regression:
Kernel Options Min val Avg val Max val Std Dev
- markers - bt cfg 15.349127 16.169459 16.372980 0.184417
+ markers - bt cfg 15.280382 16.202398 16.409257 0.191861
why isnt the marker near zero-cost as it should be? (as long as they are
enabled but are not in actual use) 2% increase is _ALOT_.
The increase in the mean is actually 0.033, or 0.2%.
So there's something wrong going on - either markers have unacceptably
high cost, or the measurement is not valid.
The third option is that the measurement just needs to be done more
times. The standard error in the mean for the + markers case is
0.191861 / sqrt(10) = 0.061, which is twice the size of the difference
being measured.
--
Joshua Root, jmr AT gelato.unsw.edu.au
http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
