Re: Useful fork info? WAS Re: [BENCHMARK] fork_load module tested for contest

William Lee Irwin III (wli@holomorphy.com)
Thu, 26 Sep 2002 01:36:10 -0700


On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 12:57:16PM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> fork_load:
> Kernel Time CPU Ratio
> 2.4.19 97.11 67% 1.33
> 2.4.19-ck7 72.34 92% 0.99
> 2.5.38 75.32 92% 1.03
> 2.5.38-mm2 74.99 92% 1.03
> 2.4.19: Children forked: 32750
> 2.4.19-ck7: Children forked: 6477
> 2.5.38: Children forked: 5545
> 2.5.38-mm2: Children forked: 5351
> You can see clearly repeatedly forking a new process significantly slows down
> compile time for 2.4.19 but not the O(1) based kernels. However, the number of
> processes that are forked is significantly reduced.
> Is this information useful?

Well, it means something. I should point out that the cost of pagetable
copying is increased by pte-based reverse mapping, and your "children
forked" throughput results reflect this. It's a known issue, and AFAIK
regarded as a reasonable tradeoff.

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