+---------------------------------+
| Profile Report | Event = Cycles |
+---------------------------------+
* One sample = 65536 events *
Begin End Sample Image Total
Address Address Name Count Pct Pct
------- ------- ---- ----- --- ---
0000000000000000-0000000120006F2F /root/hint/DOUBLE 4363066 95.7
0000000120001800-0000000120001B1F Hint 4355514 99.8 95.6
FFFFFC0000300000-00000000FFFFFFFF vmlinux 186636 4.1
FFFFFC0000315E40-FFFFFC0000315F7F do_entInt 79440 42.6 1.7
+--------------------------------------+
| Profile Report | Event = Bcache Miss |
+--------------------------------------+
* One sample = 16384 events *
Begin End Sample Image Total
Address Address Name Count Pct Pct
------- ------- ---- ----- --- ---
0000000000000000-0000000120006F2F /root/hint/DOUBLE 34579 93.6
0000000120001800-0000000120001B1F Hint 34571 100.0 93.6
FFFFFC0000300000-00000000FFFFFFFF vmlinux 2232 6.0
FFFFFC0000315E40-FFFFFC0000315F7F do_entInt 768 34.4 2.1
(I asked Iprobe to only show me functions where >1% of the time was being
spent)
We can see that time is not being spent in any libraries.
We can get a breakdown by PC, but that isn't particularly useful unless
someone really wants to take time to look at it.
Iprobe should only add a small amount of noise to the system. (5%)
--Phil
Digital/Compaq: HPSD/Benchmark Performance Engineering
Phillip.Ezolt@compaq.com ezolt@perf.zko.dec.com
On Tue, 4 May 1999, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Alan probably misread the original message because HINT benchmark indeed
>
> I did. Sorry for not replying earlier but I've been in the Algarve for a few
> days.
>
> > As with any other benchmark the compiler used does show in the results
> > but not terribly much. To be completely certain the benchmark should be
> > compiled with the same compiler, version and optimization flags which I
> > think wasn't the case with Otto Solares' test runs but this can't
> > explain all the differences.
>
> The BSD and Linux gcc will produce close to identical code and different
> libcs. If libc is involved then its still clearly a valid benchmark just
> different things need fixing
>
> > Yes, I agree. I suggest more people to try the HINT benchmark. The code
> > is ANSI-C and seems generally professional quite unlike the bytemark
> > benchmark.
>
> A benchmark from an outside source, with no bias, with source code and no
> huge fees is a rather nice thing.
>
> Richard Gooch has a performance monitoring patch for Linux. The PMC registers
> on the PPro and higher can count many types of cache misses which may be
> most enligtening
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/