Re: Linux Kernel Markers - performance characterization with large IO load on large-ish system
|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
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 0.191861why 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-btrace" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html