Re: the evil interrupt stats monster is still around!

["Simon 'corecode' Schubert" <corecode@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Matthew Dillon wrote:
> :ktrace.  These are real numbers, not a microbenchmark.  There might be a little bit of load interfering, dunno.  You can grab the dump from <http://chlamydia.fs.ei.tum.de/~corecode/unsorted/kdump.out.bz2>
>     Use kdump -R !!! 

heh.  well, the absolute ones help me process the time automatically.

>     What it looks like is happening is that there are other processes
>     running that get the cpu after the fork/wait4, before the child
>     gets the cpu.  Insofar as I can tell it looks like there is a cpu-bound
>     program running that is simply not making any system calls to be traced,
>     or is not being traced.

Yah, quite possible.  However, why'd that only happen for for fork and not for other possibly blocking syscalls (or vfork)?  I think we need some better, performance-counter based tracing tools, rather than plain kdump output.

>     Are you running anything in parallel during this test or running
>     a parallel build of some sort?

I don't remember anymore, probably there was a build going on in parallel.  But again, I'm not trying to benchmark, I'm trying to find a cause for the slow build speed.

cheers
 simon

--
Serve - BSD     +++  RENT this banner advert  +++    ASCII Ribbon   /"\
Work - Mac      +++  space for low €€€ NOW!1  +++      Campaign     \ /
Party Enjoy Relax   |   http://dragonflybsd.org      Against  HTML   \
Dude 2c 2 the max   !   http://golden-apple.biz       Mail + News   / \