[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] oprofile inband code results
From: |
Eric Blossom |
Subject: |
Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] oprofile inband code results |
Date: |
Sun, 7 Oct 2007 13:28:40 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.9i |
On Sat, Oct 06, 2007 at 06:02:09PM -0400, George Nychis wrote:
>
>
> George Nychis wrote:
> >Heres a new and important run, where it seems like the application
> >cannot keep up (Eric knows what I'm talking about) from the low
> >interpolation and decimation rates, the memory usage shoots through the
> >roof, and the system ends up locking up for a period of time:
> >
> >http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/gnychis/inband_tx_rx_3
> >
> >the PMT library is really sucking face with 23% of the time, surpassing
> >libm, libc and libstdc++ which are at 22%.
> >
> >I can certainly think of ways of reducing the PMT usage... there are
> >numerous cases where I will parse a PMT list, and pass the list to
> >another method only to re-parse it because it is convenient rather than
> >passing tons of parameters. :)
> >
> >- George
> >
>
> and just to clarify, i'm not saying it would be extremely beneficial to
> optimize the PMT use through all of the inband code... but most
> certainly in the TX and RX chain through the inband code. Optimizing
> the parsing of TX and RX messages would seem key.
>
> - George
George,
Your profile shows:
44459 2.2640 libpmt.so
pmt_cons(boost::shared_ptr<pmt_base>, boost::shared_ptr<pmt_base>)
45992 2.3421 libusrp_inband.so.0.0.0
usrp_usb_interface::handle_message(boost::shared_ptr<mb_message>)
51390 2.6170 libm-2.5.so (no symbols)
56609 2.8828 libmblock.so
mb_msg_accepter_smp::operator()(boost::shared_ptr<pmt_base>,
boost::shared_ptr<pmt_base>, boost::shared_ptr<pmt_base>, unsigned int)
62358 3.1755 libstdc++.so.6.0.8 (no symbols)
65506 3.3358 vmlinux-2.6.20-16-generic schedule
73772 3.7568 libpmt.so pmt_nthcdr(unsigned int,
boost::shared_ptr<pmt_base>)
337319 17.1777 libc-2.5.so (no symbols)
Before even thinking about libpmt, it would be wise to figure out the
much greater CPU consumption in libc. Start with the big offenders.
When that's sorted out (and we're confident about your profile
numbers) we can have a discussion about what's next.
BTW, what is the test case that you're running?
What is the exact sequence of commands that you are issuing to
generate this trace? I'd like to try to reproduce this on my machines.
Eric
- [Discuss-gnuradio] oprofile inband code results, George Nychis, 2007/10/06
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] oprofile inband code results, Johnathan Corgan, 2007/10/06
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] oprofile inband code results, George Nychis, 2007/10/06
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] oprofile inband code results, George Nychis, 2007/10/06
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] oprofile inband code results, George Nychis, 2007/10/06
- AW: [Discuss-gnuradio] oprofile inband code results, Dominik Auras, 2007/10/07
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] oprofile inband code results,
Eric Blossom <=
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] oprofile inband code results, George Nychis, 2007/10/07
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] oprofile inband code results, Eric Blossom, 2007/10/07
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] oprofile inband code results, George Nychis, 2007/10/08
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] oprofile inband code results, George Nychis, 2007/10/09
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] oprofile inband code results, Eric Blossom, 2007/10/09
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] oprofile inband code results, George Nychis, 2007/10/09
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] oprofile inband code results, George Nychis, 2007/10/09
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] oprofile inband code results, Brian Padalino, 2007/10/09
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] oprofile inband code results, Brian Padalino, 2007/10/09
- Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] oprofile inband code results, Eric Blossom, 2007/10/09