This is the mail archive of the systemtap@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the systemtap project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Experiences with kprobes


Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
Hi -

On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 03:13:17PM +0000, Baruch Even wrote:

[...]  In the test with the probes I only get the cwnd up to about
3000, with a round trip of 300ms and delayed acking, it means
3000*1000/300/2 = 5000 packets per second. [...]  we get double the
rate of ACKs which sends us to 10000 pps, at which stage the probes
will probably affect behaviour significantly enough. [...]

But 10000 packets per second at 10000 clocks per packet (from your
previous message) represents only 1/30th of the raw capacity of a 3 GHz CPU. Before instrumentation, it would have been 1/60th or so.
It's strange that this 1/60th difference is enough to bog your test down.

In my updated testing of the fully optimized code of 2.6.6 it still gets the work done. On the partial optimization done for 2.6.11 it performs worse than the same optimizations for 2.6.6 with the old instrumentation.


So at the end of my porting work to 2.6.11 everything will work, but I am hoping to show the step-by-step improvements and not just the jump from start to finish. I also need to justify each patch to the LKML crowd, and to myself.

And the target goal is to be able to work at least for 1Gbps rate and I'm only at a third of that...

So yes, I can use Kprobes for now but I'm looking for something with less overhead if I can find it. I do appreciate the work you are doing with kprobes, it looks (and is!) amazing, but I'm not sure this is the best tool for my task at this time.

Baruch


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]