Basically I am looking for methodology guidelines for doing my own testing
on a bunch of techniques in different papers and seeing what the
performance impact is overall. Are there guidelines for doing such things?
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 3:19 AM wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 01:23:45 +0800,
On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 01:23:45 +0800, Carter Cheng said:
> I am actually looking at some changes that litter the kernel with short
> code snippets and thus according to papers i have read can result in CPU
> hits of around 48% when applied is userspace.
You're going to need to be more specific.
I am actually looking at some changes that litter the kernel with short
code snippets and thus according to papers i have read can result in CPU
hits of around 48% when applied is userspace. I am curious how you would
best measure the impact of similar modifications (since obviously one isn't
On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 23:42:03 +0800, Carter Cheng said:
> I was wondering what are some good ways to assess the performance impact of
> kernel modifications. Are there some papers in the literature where this is
> done? Does one need to differentiate between CPU bound and different types
> of I/O
Hi,
I was wondering what are some good ways to assess the performance impact of
kernel modifications. Are there some papers in the literature where this is
done? Does one need to differentiate between CPU bound and different types
of I/O bound processes etc?
Regards,
Carter.
Hi all!
On 15/10/18 14:17, Lev Olshvang wrote:
[...]
> I am debugging kernel module and use SystemTap to monitor requested and
> freed memory.
>
> I see that SystemTap statistics shows that kfree() is called 5 times more
> than kalloc.
> It happens not only on my module, it happens on
Hello all,
I am debugging kernel module and use SystemTap to monitor requested and freed
memory.
I see that SystemTap statistics shows that kfree() is called 5 times more than
kalloc.
It happens not only on my module, it happens on VirtualBox vboxsf driver as
well.
See hits count below
