WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC V2 3/5] jump_label: if a key has already been

To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC V2 3/5] jump_label: if a key has already been initialized, don't nop it out
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 15:10:39 -0700
Cc: the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx>, David Daney <david.daney@xxxxxxxxxx>, peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Jason Baron <jbaron@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Glauber <jang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Richard Henderson <rth@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Michael Ellerman <michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Xen Devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 15:11:18 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1317938775.4729.29.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <cover.1317506051.git.jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx> <477dead9647029012f93c651f2892ed0e86b89e7.1317506051.git.jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx> <20111003150205.GB2462@xxxxxxxxxx> <4E89E28C.7010700@xxxxxxxx> <20111004141011.GA2520@xxxxxxxxxx> <4E8B3489.60902@xxxxxxxxx> <4E8CF348.4080405@xxxxxxxx> <4E8CF385.2080804@xxxxxxxxx> <4E8DEB19.1050509@xxxxxxxx> <20111006181055.GA2505@xxxxxxxxxx> <1317925615.4729.14.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4E8DF870.6010000@xxxxxxxxxx> <1317929321.4729.17.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4E8E20CD.5030207@xxxxxxxx> <1317938775.4729.29.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110930 Thunderbird/7.0.1
On 10/06/2011 03:06 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> But it only speeds up the tracing case. The non-tracing case is a nop
> and 5bytes is 5bytes regardless.
>
> Did you see a 5% speed up while tracing was happening? How did you do
> your test. I find a 5 byte compared to a 2 byte jump being negligible
> with the rest of the overhead of tracing, but I could be wrong.

You're right, this was a completely artificial microbenchmark.  In
practice the improvement would be a much smaller effect.

But bear in mind, I'm not using jump-label for tracing.  While its
important for the "disabled" state to be quick, performance of the
"enabled" state is also important.

Thanks,
    J

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>