linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Con Kolivas <conman@kolivas.net>
To: linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
Subject: [BENCHMARK] 2.5.59-mm8 with contest
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 22:21:49 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200302052221.55663.conman@kolivas.net> (raw)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Here are contest benchmarks using osdl hardware. More resolution has been 
added to the io loads and read load (thanks Aggelos)

no_load:
Kernel     [runs]       Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.59          3       79      94.9    0.0     0.0     1.00
2.5.59-mm7      5       78      96.2    0.0     0.0     1.00
2.5.59-mm8      3       79      93.7    0.0     0.0     1.00
cacherun:
Kernel     [runs]       Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.59          3       76      98.7    0.0     0.0     0.96
2.5.59-mm7      5       75      98.7    0.0     0.0     0.96
2.5.59-mm8      3       76      97.4    0.0     0.0     0.96
process_load:
Kernel     [runs]       Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.59          3       92      81.5    28.3    16.3    1.16
2.5.59-mm7      3       95      77.9    33.7    18.9    1.22
2.5.59-mm8      3       195     37.9    205.3   60.5    2.47

seems the scheduler changes have changed the balance of what work is done with 
this process load. No cpu cycles are wasted so it is not necessarily a bad 
result.


ctar_load:
Kernel     [runs]       Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.59          3       98      80.6    2.0     5.1     1.24
2.5.59-mm7      5       96      80.2    1.4     3.4     1.23
2.5.59-mm8      3       99      78.8    2.0     5.1     1.25
xtar_load:
Kernel     [runs]       Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.59          3       101     75.2    1.0     4.0     1.28
2.5.59-mm7      5       96      79.2    0.8     3.3     1.23
2.5.59-mm8      3       100     77.0    1.0     4.0     1.27
io_load:
Kernel     [runs]       Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.59          3       154     48.7    32.6    12.3    1.95
2.5.59-mm7      3       112     67.0    15.9    7.1     1.44
2.5.59-mm8      3       152     50.0    35.4    13.1    1.92

This seems to be creeping up to the same as 2.5.59


read_load:
Kernel     [runs]       Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.59          3       101     77.2    6.3     5.0     1.28
2.5.59-mm7      3       94      80.9    2.8     2.1     1.21
2.5.59-mm8      3       93      81.7    2.8     2.2     1.18
list_load:
Kernel     [runs]       Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.59          3       95      80.0    0.0     6.3     1.20
2.5.59-mm7      4       94      80.9    0.0     6.4     1.21
2.5.59-mm8      3       98      78.6    0.0     6.1     1.24
mem_load:
Kernel     [runs]       Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.59          3       97      80.4    56.7    2.1     1.23
2.5.59-mm7      4       92      82.6    45.5    1.4     1.18
2.5.59-mm8      3       97      80.4    53.3    2.1     1.23
dbench_load:
Kernel     [runs]       Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.59          3       126     60.3    3.3     22.2    1.59
2.5.59-mm7      4       121     62.0    2.8     24.8    1.55
2.5.59-mm8      3       212     35.8    11.0    47.2    2.68

and this seems to be taking significantly longer


io_other:
Kernel     [runs]       Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.59          3       89      84.3    11.2    5.4     1.13
2.5.59-mm7      3       92      81.5    12.6    6.5     1.18
2.5.59-mm8      3       115     67.8    35.2    18.3    1.46

And this load which normally changes little has significantly different 
results.

Con
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+QPPNF6dfvkL3i1gRAjh9AJ0VrUQBD9SbKX8jQNOtnYlwv0Ud2QCfdU+Q
k6hvNs0RWwIBc4PLSrc5eSo=
=ujgV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

             reply	other threads:[~2003-02-05 11:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-02-05 11:21 Con Kolivas [this message]
2003-02-05 20:37 ` [BENCHMARK] 2.5.59-mm8 with contest Andrew Morton
2003-02-06  1:02   ` Nick Piggin
2003-02-06  8:08   ` Con Kolivas
2003-02-07  8:22     ` Andrew Morton
2003-02-07 10:26       ` 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=200302052221.55663.conman@kolivas.net \
    --to=conman@kolivas.net \
    --cc=akpm@digeo.com \
    --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).