ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
The impact of operating system structure on memory system performance
Full text PdfPdf (1.52 MB)
Source ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles archive
Proceedings of the fourteenth ACM symposium on Operating systems principles table of contents
Asheville, North Carolina, United States
Pages: 120 - 133  
Year of Publication: 1994
ISBN:0-89791-632-8
Also published in ...
Authors
J. Bradley Chen  School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA
Brian N. Bershad  Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
Sponsor
SIGOPS: ACM Special Interest Group on Operating Systems
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 35,   Downloads (12 Months): 238,   Citation Count: 55
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/168619.168629
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

In this paper we evaluate the memory system behavior of two distinctly different implementations of the UNIX operating system: DEC's Ultrix, a monolithic system, and Mach 3.0 with CMU's UNIX server, a microkernel-based system. In our evaluation we use combined system and user memory reference traces of thirteen industry-standard workloads. We show that the microkernel-based system executes substantially more non-idle system instructions for an equivalent workload than the monolithic system. Furthermore, the average instruction for programs running on Mach has a higher cost, in terms of memory cycles per instruction, than on Ultrix. In the context of our traces, we explore a number of popular assertions about the memory system behavior of modern operating systems, paying special attention to the effect that Mach's microkernel architecture has on system performance. Our results indicate that many, but not all of the assertions are true, and that a few, while true, have only negligible impact on real system performance.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
Michael J. Accetta, Robert V. Baron, William Bolosky, David B. Golub, Richard F. Rashid, Avadis Tevanian, Jr., and Michael W. Young Mach: A New Kernel Foundation for Unix Development. Proceedings of the Summer 1986 USENIX Conference, July, 1986, pp. 93-113
2
3
 
4
5
6
 
7
8
 
9
Brian N. Bershad, Richard P. Draves, and Alessandro Forin. Using Microbenchmarks to Evaluate System Performance. The Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Workstation Operating Systems, April, 1992, pp 148-153.
 
10
Anita Borg, R.E. Kessler, Georgia Lazana, and David Wall Long Address Traces from RISC Machines: Generation and Analysis. WRL Research Report 89/14, Digital Equipment Corporation Western Research Laboratory, 1989
 
11
J. Bradley Chen. Software Methods for System Address Tracing. The Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Workstation Operating Systems, October, 1993
 
12
J. Bradley Chen. Memory Behavior for an X 11 Window System. The Proceedings of the Winter 1994 USENIX Conference, January, 1994.
13
14
15
 
16
M. DeMoney, J. Moore, and J. Mashey. Operating System Support on a RISC. Proceedings of the 31 st Computer Society International Conference (Spring Compcon '86), March, 1986, pp 138-143.
 
17
Digital Equipment Corporation. cord. Ultrix manual page.
18
 
19
Richard P Draves. A Revised IPC Interface. Proceedings of the First Mach USENIX Workshop, October, 1990, pp. 101-121.
 
20
Peter Druschel, Larry L. Peterson, and Norman C. Hutchinson. Beyond Microkernel Design: Decoupling Modularity and Protection in Lipto. The Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, June, 1992.
 
21
David Golub, Randall Dean, Alessandro Forin and Richard Rashid. UNIX as an Application Program. Proceedings of the Summer 1990 USENIX Conference, June. 1990, pp. 87-95.
 
22
 
23
 
24
25
 
26
27
28
 
29
David Nagle, Richard Uhlig, and Trevor Mudge. Monster: A Tool for Analyzing the Interaction Between Operating Systems and Computer Architectures. University of Michigan, November, 1992. CSE-TR-147-92.
30
 
31
John K. Ousterhout. Why Operating Systems Aren't Getting Faster As Fast As Hardware. Proceedings of the Summer 1991 USENIX Conference, June, 1991, pp. 247-256.
 
32
33
 
34
M. Rozier, V. Abrossimov, F. Armand, I. Boule, M. Giend, M. Guillemont, F. Herrmann, P. Leonard, S. Langlois, and W. Neuhauser. "Chorus Distributed Operating Systems". Computing Systems 1, 4 (1988), pp. 305-370.
35
 
36
 
37
David W. Wail. Systems for Late Code Modification. In Code Generation --- Concepts, Tools, Techniques, Springer- Verlag, 1992, pp. 275-293.

CITED BY  55

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.4 OPERATING SYSTEMS
      D.4.0 General

          Nouns: UNIX

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.5 Testing and Debugging
          Subjects: Tracing
  D.4 OPERATING SYSTEMS
      D.4.0 General

          Nouns: Mach
      D.4.2 Storage Management
          Subjects: Virtual memory
      D.4.8 Performance
          Subjects: Measurements


General Terms:
Design, Performance

Collaborative Colleagues:
J. Bradley Chen: colleagues
Brian N. Bershad: colleagues