low(er) disk performance with sched_4bsd then with sched_ule
gallatin at cs.duke.edu
Sat Sep 17 14:33:47 PDT 2005
Oliver Lehmann writes:
> Joseph Koshy wrote:
> > ol> Wow, that update to BETA4 did the trick! While running
> > ol> SCHED_4BSD:
> > Fantastic! What is the profile like with the new 4BSD kernel?
I don't know the disk codepath very well, but the samples look a
little suspect. We're copying a lot of data into and out of the
kernel, so I would expect the majority of non disk wait time would be
spent simply copying out the zero-filled pages, and copying them back
in (AFAIK, dd uses read/write). Where is the time spent in read,
write, uiomove, bcopy?
What about ionode allocations, etc? And why do things like
g_bsd_modify and g_bsd_ioctl rank so high? Aren't those only used
when dealing with disklabels?
BTW, I *love* that we've got access to the hw counters, and an easy
way to do low-overhead profiling of the kernel.
More information about the freebsd-current