From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 00:51:44 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 00:51:44 -0500 Received: from c17870.thoms1.vic.optusnet.com.au ([210.49.248.224]:7362 "EHLO mail.kolivas.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 00:51:43 -0500 From: Con Kolivas To: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.5.63-mm2 + i/o schedulers with contest Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 17:02:10 +1100 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <200303041354.03428.kernel@kolivas.org> <20030304001032.034f60fa.akpm@digeo.com> In-Reply-To: <20030304001032.034f60fa.akpm@digeo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200303051702.10810.kernel@kolivas.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 4 Mar 2003 07:10 pm, Andrew Morton wrote: > Con Kolivas wrote: > > Mem_load result of AS being slower was just plain weird with the result > > rising from 100 to 150 during testing. > > Maybe we should just swap computers or something? > > Finished compiling kernel: elapsed: 145 user: 180 system: 18 > Finished mem_load: elapsed: 146 user: 0 system: 2 loads: 5000 > Finished compiling kernel: elapsed: 135 user: 181 system: 17 > Finished mem_load: elapsed: 136 user: 0 system: 2 loads: 4800 > Finished compiling kernel: elapsed: 129 user: 181 system: 17 > Finished mem_load: elapsed: 130 user: 0 system: 2 loads: 4800 > > 256MB, dual CPU, ext3/IDE. Tried again - these were done as part of a full contest run, not just mem_load by itself, but these were the mem_load results: 98 128 135 then it oopsed (the one I posted earlier) and wasn't really usable after that point. Perhaps they're related. The mystery remains. I'll see what happens next mm release. Con