From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265315AbUAAB2E (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Dec 2003 20:28:04 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265317AbUAAB2E (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Dec 2003 20:28:04 -0500 Received: from [24.35.117.106] ([24.35.117.106]:21120 "EHLO localhost.localdomain") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265315AbUAAB1w (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Dec 2003 20:27:52 -0500 Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 20:27:34 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Molina X-X-Sender: tmolina@localhost.localdomain To: Roger Luethi cc: Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: 2.6.0 performance problems In-Reply-To: <20031231210354.GA9804@k3.hellgate.ch> Message-ID: References: <20031230012551.GA6226@k3.hellgate.ch> <20031230132145.B32120@hexapodia.org> <20031230194051.GD22443@holomorphy.com> <20031230222403.GA8412@k3.hellgate.ch> <20031231101741.GA4378@k3.hellgate.ch> <20031231112119.GB3089@suse.de> <20031231210354.GA9804@k3.hellgate.ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Roger Luethi wrote: > For the systematic testing, I used "qsbench -p 4 -m 96" on a 256 MB > machine. This allowed the kernel to achieve high performance with > unfairness -- that's what 2.4 does: One process dominates all others > and finishes very early, taking away most of the memory pressure. > The spike for qsbench in 2.5.39 remains if only one process is forked > (-p1 -m 384), though. > > I asked for the bk export numbers with 2.5.39 because I'm curious how > close to qsbench the behavior really is. 2.5.39 won't compile for me "out of the box". I thought it might have been the toolset, but I was running RH8 and it has gcc 3.2. Was there a big change between 3.2 and 3.3.2 in Fedora Core 1? The reason I ask is that I also can't get NISTNet to compile on Fedora Core 1 or RHEL WS 3. It looks like incompatible libraries.