Re: [PATCH] Stacker - single-use static slots

From: James Morris
Date: Thu Aug 11 2005 - 02:42:54 EST

Next message: Gleb Natapov: "Re: [openib-general] Re: [PATCH repost] PROT_DONTCOPY: ifiniband uverbs fork support"
Previous message: Matti Aarnio: "Re: Soft lockup in e100 driver ?"
In reply to: serue: "Re: [PATCH] Stacker - single-use static slots"
Next in thread: serue: "Re: [PATCH] Stacker - single-use static slots"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, serue@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> those annoying cache effects, I assume - 3 slots (the default)
> outperforms two slots, even though only one slot is being used. These
> tests were run on a 16-way power4+ system. I may try to re-run on some
> x86 hardware, though each run will probably take 24 hours.

I've also run some benchmarks, comparing vanilla kernel with the
two stacker approaches. Results below.

Results seem to be mixed, sometimes a bit better, sometimes a bit worse.
The macro benchmarks tend to show better figures for the static slot
model.

Overall, it seems that SELinux could expect to take a 1-2% performance hit
with the stacker.

==============================================================================
Performance testing summary using the stacker patches, 11 Aug 2005.

Test system:
8-way 900Mhz PIII Xeon, 4GB RAM, FC4, current updates.

Test data was managed on an ext2 filesystem, using targeted policy.
Kernel version 2.6.13-rc4.

The kernel was configured as follows:

control
Standard kernel with SELinux and secondarily stacked capabilities.

stacker_dynamic
Stacker with fully dynamic security fields, SELinux + caps.

stacker_static
Stacker with three static slots for security fields, SELinux + caps.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unixbench
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Six iterations.
Larger is better.

1) control

Execl Throughput 43.0 1159.7 269.7
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 93041.0 235.0
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 44393.0 268.2
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 129172.0 222.7
Pipe Throughput 12440.0 217759.8 175.0
Process Creation 126.0 5687.4 451.4
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 750.9 1251.5
System Call Overhead 15000.0 752195.3 501.5
=========
FINAL SCORE 342.1

2) stacker_dynamic

Execl Throughput 43.0 1163.8 270.7
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 92321.0 233.1
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 44309.0 267.7
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 128635.0 221.8
Pipe Throughput 12440.0 211583.8 170.1
Process Creation 126.0 5657.9 449.0
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 744.0 1240.0
System Call Overhead 15000.0 759228.4 506.2
=========
FINAL SCORE 340.2

3) stacker_static

Execl Throughput 43.0 1159.6 269.7
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks 3960.0 88455.0 223.4
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks 1655.0 40165.0 242.7
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks 5800.0 125384.0 216.2
Pipe Throughput 12440.0 208970.6 168.0
Process Creation 126.0 5712.9 453.4
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent) 6.0 752.5 1254.2
System Call Overhead 15000.0 746153.0 497.4
=========
FINAL SCORE 332.7

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apachebench
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Local webserver, logging to /dev/null.
100k requests of a 100k file.

---------------------------------------------------------
#clients 1 2 4 8
---------------------------------------------------------
control : 15627.93 18715.48 20377.54 21543.10
stacker_dynamic : 15371.80 18049.45 20281.98 21037.24
stacker_static : 15247.48 18395.96 20579.46 21523.41
---------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
dbench
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

300s tests incl. 60s of warmup.
Throughput in MB/s.
Larger is better.

-----------------------------------------------------
# procs 2 4 8 16
-----------------------------------------------------
control : 200.264 351.135 514.327 483.085
stacker_dynamic : 192.805 336.097 511.713 474.047
stacker_static : 197.254 333.781 510.713 471.581
-----------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
lmbench
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Processor, Processes - times in microseconds - smaller is better
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Host OS Mhz null null open slct sig sig fork exec sh
call I/O stat clos TCP inst hndl proc proc proc
--------- ------------- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
control Linux 2.6.13- 900 0.24 0.85 5.29 6.83 23.6 1.01 3.98 215. 1054 3482
stack_dyn Linux 2.6.13- 900 0.24 0.91 5.72 7.17 23.6 1.01 4.25 211. 1046 3500
stack_sta Linux 2.6.13- 900 0.24 0.89 5.41 6.97 27.3 1.01 4.28 209. 1052 3450

Context switching - times in microseconds - smaller is better
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Host OS 2p/0K 2p/16K 2p/64K 8p/16K 8p/64K 16p/16K 16p/64K
ctxsw ctxsw ctxsw ctxsw ctxsw ctxsw ctxsw
--------- ------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------- -------
control Linux 2.6.13- 1.7800 5.3700 7.0500 12.0 6.1000 4.42000 11.6
stack_dyn Linux 2.6.13- 2.1100 3.9800 2.0400 10.2 12.5 8.44000 19.6
stack_sta Linux 2.6.13- 1.8800 4.2500 2.1700 10.2 20.5 9.56000 25.1

*Local* Communication latencies in microseconds - smaller is better
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Host OS 2p/0K Pipe AF UDP RPC/ TCP RPC/ TCP
ctxsw UNIX UDP TCP conn
--------- ------------- ----- ----- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----
control Linux 2.6.13- 1.780 52.3 18.2 100.1 83.4 112.1 96.1 177.
stack_dyn Linux 2.6.13- 2.110 30.4 25.3 101.7 83.7 112.8 98.4 180.
stack_sta Linux 2.6.13- 1.880 52.5 20.6 102.6 84.2 112.7 97.1 180.

File & VM system latencies in microseconds - smaller is better
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Host OS 0K File 10K File Mmap Prot Page 100fd
Create Delete Create Delete Latency Fault Fault selct
--------- ------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------- ----- ------- -----
control Linux 2.6.13- 42.4 18.1 79.6 33.4 4066.0 0.341 2.73660 20.8
stack_dyn Linux 2.6.13- 44.2 18.5 77.7 34.2 4064.0 0.217 2.73910 18.5
stack_sta Linux 2.6.13- 44.2 18.4 77.6 34.5 4072.0 0.201 2.76820 18.4

*Local* Communication bandwidths in MB/s - bigger is better
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Host OS Pipe AF TCP File Mmap Bcopy Bcopy Mem Mem
UNIX reread reread (libc) (hand) read write
--------- ------------- ---- ---- ---- ------ ------ ------ ------ ---- -----
control Linux 2.6.13- 105. 163. 106. 228.3 256.7 133.4 130.0 256. 201.4
stack_dyn Linux 2.6.13- 207. 295. 170. 228.1 256.7 133.7 130.2 257. 201.1
stack_sta Linux 2.6.13- 107. 162. 106. 227.6 256.6 133.4 130.4 257. 201.6

==============================================================================

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Gleb Natapov: "Re: [openib-general] Re: [PATCH repost] PROT_DONTCOPY: ifiniband uverbs fork support"
Previous message: Matti Aarnio: "Re: Soft lockup in e100 driver ?"
In reply to: serue: "Re: [PATCH] Stacker - single-use static slots"
Next in thread: serue: "Re: [PATCH] Stacker - single-use static slots"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]