Re: [PATCH] A new entry for /proc

[Mauricio Lin]

Hi all,

I comitted a mistake. Indeed the old smaps is still faster than new one.

Take a look:

Old smaps
real 19.52
user 2.15
sys 17.27

New smaps
real 25.93
user 3.19
sys 22.31

Any comments????

BR,

Mauricio Lin.

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 11:14:36 -0400, Mauricio Lin <mauriciolin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I tested the two smaps entry using time command.
> 
> I tested 100.000 cat commands with smaps for each version.
> 
> I checked the difference between the two versions and the new one is
> faster than old one. So Hugh is correct about the loop performance.
> 
> Thanks!!!
> 
> Mauricio Lin.
> 
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 03:52:55 -0800, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Mauricio Lin <mauriciolin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > But can i use jiffies to measure this kind of performance??? AFAIK, if
> > >  it is more efficient, then it is faster, right? How can I know how
> > >  fast it is? Any idea?
> >
> > umm,
> >
> > time ( for i in $(seq 100); do; cat /proc/nnn/smaps; done > /dev/null )
> >
> > ?
> >
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/