Re: [PATCH] of: cache phandle nodes to decrease cost of of_find_node_by_phandle()
From: Chintan Pandya <hidden>
Date: 2018-02-07 12:44:30
Also in:
lkml
On 2/5/2018 5:53 PM, Chintan Pandya wrote:
quoted
My question was trying to determine whether the numbers reported above are for a debug configuration or a production configuration.My reported numbers are from debug configuration.quoted
not a production configuration, I was requesting the numbers for a production configuration.I'm working on it. But please expect some delay in my response for this. As I mentioned earlier, I need to work with few teams to get these numbers.quoted
show a significant boot time reduction from the patch then there is less justification for adding complexity to the existing code. I prefer to use simpler data structures and algorithms __if__ extra complexity does not provide any advantage. The balance between complexity and benefits is a core software engineering issue.Ok
Avg Kernel boot time comparison in production set up: [0] Base: 4519ms [1] 4115ms (~400ms improvement) [2] 4115ms (~400ms improvement) [3] 4177ms (~340ms improvement) Full data: [1] 1024 sized pre-populated cache ITR-1 ITR-2 ITR-3 ITR-4 Avg 4115 4123 4124 4107 4115 [2] Dynamic sized cache allocation/free ITR-1 ITR-2 ITR-3 ITR-4 Avg 4122 4131 4106 4118 4115 [3] Fixed 64 sized cache ITR-1 ITR-2 ITR-3 ITR-4 Avg 4153 4186 4198 4181 4177 [1] is my experimental patch and dirty enough to not get merged anywhere. So, I will not push it. Chintan -- Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html