From: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
To: Con Kolivas <conman@kolivas.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.5.39-mm1
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 12:36:48 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D98A7D0.8F07193F@digeo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 200209301941.41627.conman@kolivas.net
Con Kolivas wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Here follow the contest v0.41 (http://contest.kolivas.net) results for
> 2.5.39-mm1:
>
> noload:
> Kernel Time CPU Ratio
> 2.4.19 67.71 98% 1.00
> 2.5.38 72.38 94% 1.07
> 2.5.38-mm3 73.00 93% 1.08
> 2.5.39 73.17 93% 1.08
> 2.5.39-mm1 72.97 94% 1.08
2.4.19 achieves higher CPU occupancy - you're using `make -j4', so it
could be a CPU scheduler artifact, or a disk readahead latency effect.
Is the kernel source in-cache for these runs?
> process_load:
> Kernel Time CPU Ratio
> 2.4.19 110.75 57% 1.64
> 2.5.38 85.71 79% 1.27
> 2.5.38-mm3 96.32 72% 1.42
> 2.5.39 88.9 75% 1.33*
> 2.5.39-mm1 99.0 69% 1.45*
Not sure what to make of this test. We have a bunch of tasks
sending data between each other across pipes while trying to
build a kernel.
It could be that with 2.4.19, those piping processes got a lot
more work done.
I'd be inclined to drop this test; not sure what it means.
> io_load:
> Kernel Time CPU Ratio
> 2.4.19 216.05 33% 3.19
> 2.5.38 887.76 8% 13.11
> 2.5.38-mm3 105.17 70% 1.55
> 2.5.39 229.4 34% 3.4
> 2.5.39-mm1 239.5 33% 3.4
I think I'll set fifo_batch to 16 again...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-09-30 19:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-09-30 9:41 [BENCHMARK] 2.5.39-mm1 Con Kolivas
2002-09-30 19:36 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2002-09-30 20:36 ` Con Kolivas
2002-10-01 10:16 ` Jens Axboe
2002-10-01 10:15 ` Jens Axboe
[not found] ` <3D9976D9.C06466B@digeo.com>
2002-10-01 12:19 ` Con Kolivas
2002-10-01 12:30 ` Jens Axboe
2002-10-01 13:44 ` Con Kolivas
2002-10-01 15:49 ` Jens Axboe
2002-10-01 23:41 ` jw schultz
[not found] ` <5.1.0.14.2.20021001190123.00b3cdc8@pop.gmx.net>
[not found] ` <20021001172200.GH5755@suse.de>
2002-10-02 2:55 ` Con Kolivas
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3D98A7D0.8F07193F@digeo.com \
--to=akpm@digeo.com \
--cc=conman@kolivas.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).