Wireshark mailing list archives
Re: The cost of memory allocation
From: Graham Bloice <graham.bloice () trihedral com>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 09:49:15 +0100
On 21 September 2016 at 09:29, Paul Offord <Paul.Offord () advance7 com> wrote:
I’m not happy with the performance of the transum dissector and so I’ve started some analysis. I’ve never used VS performance profiling before but I plan try to investigate this problem using it. In the meantime I’ve used a tool that I’m reasonably familiar with called PerfView. It’s produced some interesting results which I thought I’d share. The problem I’m having is that with transum enabled load time for a 50MB file increases from 5 seconds to 10 seconds, but then subsequent loads of the same file go out to about 40 or 50 seconds. Above (or attached depending on your email system) is a screen shot showing the time spent in various functions when a load of the file took 44.8 seconds. At the top of the image is a transum function called decode_gtcp. The image shows that 50.7% of the total load time was spent executing in this function. Then we see all of the nested functions with the proportion of time spent in each of those. What I notice is that a lot of time is being spent in glib functions, and in particular the time is being spent allocating and freeing memory. Using a slightly different view we can see that across the whole of the process during a load file with transum enabled more than 66% of the time is spent messing around with memory. I haven’t yet figured out why I get inconsistent load times, and I don’t know what I can do about any of the above, but I thought it might be of general interest. Best regards…Paul
Release or debug build? -- Graham Bloice
___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe
Current thread:
- The cost of memory allocation Paul Offord (Sep 21)
- Re: The cost of memory allocation Graham Bloice (Sep 21)
- Re: The cost of memory allocation Paul Offord (Sep 21)
- Re: The cost of memory allocation Graham Bloice (Sep 21)
- Re: The cost of memory allocation Paul Offord (Sep 21)
- Re: The cost of memory allocation Max Dmitrichenko (Sep 21)
- Re: The cost of memory allocation Paul Offord (Sep 21)
- Re: The cost of memory allocation Paul Offord (Sep 21)
- Re: The cost of memory allocation Graham Bloice (Sep 21)
- Re: The cost of memory allocation Anders Broman (Sep 21)
- Re: The cost of memory allocation Paul Offord (Sep 21)
- Re: The cost of memory allocation Anders Broman (Sep 22)
- Re: The cost of memory allocation Paul Offord (Sep 25)
- Re: The cost of memory allocation Graham Bloice (Sep 21)