From: rwhron@earthlink.net
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [BENCHMARK] 2.5.68 and 2.5.68-mm2
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 19:09:39 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030425230939.GA2281@rushmore> (raw)
There are a few benchmarks that have changed dramatically
between 2.5.68 and 2.5.68-mm2.
Machine is Quad P3 700 mhz Xeon with 1M cache.
3.75 GB RAM.
RAID0 LUN
QLogic 2200 Fiber channel
Some config differences. 2.5.68 has standard Qlogic driver.
2.5.68-mm2 has new Qlogic driver and the 2/2 GB memory split.
Only in 2.5.68
CONFIG_SCSI_QLOGIC_FC=y
CONFIG_SCSI_QLOGIC_FC_FIRMWARE=y
CONFIG_SCSI_QLOGIC_ISP=y
Only in 2.5.68-mm2
CONFIG_2GB=y
CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO=y
CONFIG_NR_SIBLINGS_0=y
CONFIG_SCSI_QLOGIC_ISP_NEW=y
CONFIG_SPINLINE=y
One recent change is -mm2 is 17-19% faster at tbench.
The logfiles don't indicate any errors. Wonder what helped?
tbench 192 processes Average High Low
2.5.68-mm2 139.44 142.14 136.77 MB/sec
2.5.68 118.78 132.41 111.45
tbench 64 processes Average High Low
2.5.68-mm2 136.34 143.66 124.13 MB/sec
2.5.68 114.30 116.88 111.33
The autoconf-2.53 make/make check is a fork test. 2.5.68
is about 13% faster here.
kernel average min_time max_time
2.5.68 732.8 729 738 seconds
2.5.68-mm2 833.3 824 841
On the AIM7 database test, -mm2 was about 18% faster and
uses about 15% more CPU time. (Real and CPU are in seconds).
The new Qlogic driver helps AIM7.
AIM7 dbase workload
kernel Tasks Jobs/Min Real CPU
2.5.68-mm2 32 559.8 339.6 164.0
2.5.68 32 477.1 398.4 150.9
2.5.68-mm2 64 714.1 532.4 312.3
2.5.68 64 608.3 625.0 272.4
2.5.68-mm2 96 785.6 725.9 458.8
2.5.68 96 664.7 857.8 393.9
2.5.68-mm2 128 832.1 913.8 640.0
2.5.68 128 702.3 1082.5 515.5
2.5.68-mm2 160 858.5 1107.0 712.2
2.5.68 160 726.7 1307.8 624.2
2.5.68-mm2 192 880.4 1295.4 871.1
2.5.68 192 745.7 1529.5 763.0
2.5.68-mm2 224 895.1 1486.5 1005.1
2.5.68 224 758.0 1755.3 868.4
2.5.68-mm2 256 907.8 1675.1 1144.5
2.5.68 256 767.5 1981.3 987.2
On the AIM7 shared test, -mm2 is 15-19% faster and
uses about 5% more CPU time.
AIM7 shared workload
kernel Tasks Jobs/Min Real CPU
2.5.68-mm2 64 2447.0 152.2 180.8
2.5.68 64 2110.4 176.5 170.0
2.5.68-mm2 128 2705.0 275.4 357.6
2.5.68 128 2276.9 327.2 337.2
2.5.68-mm2 192 2708.3 412.6 537.5
2.5.68 192 2265.4 493.3 506.8
2.5.68-mm2 256 2746.1 542.5 716.3
2.5.68 256 2304.7 646.5 677.5
2.5.68-mm2 320 2732.9 681.5 900.0
2.5.68 320 2296.3 811.0 849.4
L M B E N C H 2 . 0 S U M M A R Y
------------------------------------
The lmbench process latency results go along with the autoconf
build results.
Processor, Processes - times in microseconds - smaller is better
----------------------------------------------------------------
fork execve /bin/sh
kernel process process process
------------- ------- ------- -------
2.5.68 243 979 4401
2.5.68-mm2 502 1715 5200
The lmbench context switch tests have an interesting pattern.
With low processes and small packets, 2.5.68 has lower latency.
2.5.68-mm2 turns the table for high process big packet tests.
Context switching with 0K - times in microseconds - smaller is better
---------------------------------------------------------------------
2proc/0k 4proc/0k 8proc/0k 16proc/0k 32proc/0k 64proc/0k 96proc/0k
kernel ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch
2.5.68 1.32 2.63 2.38 2.41 2.42 2.87 3.79
2.5.68-mm2 6.80 6.97 6.74 6.59 6.43 5.94 6.17
Context switching with 4K - times in microseconds - smaller is better
---------------------------------------------------------------------
2proc/4k 4proc/4k 8proc/4k 16proc/4k 32proc/4k 64proc/4k 96proc/4k
kernel ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch
2.5.68 1.81 3.53 3.79 4.26 4.62 6.06 8.30
2.5.68-mm2 6.91 7.13 7.29 7.57 7.72 7.38 7.91
Context switching with 8K - times in microseconds - smaller is better
---------------------------------------------------------------------
2proc/8k 4proc/8k 8proc/8k 16proc/8k 32proc/8k 64proc/8k 96proc/8k
kernel ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch
2.5.68 3.31 5.35 5.16 5.29 6.07 12.05 19.60
2.5.68-mm2 7.20 8.42 8.86 8.87 9.12 9.13 10.51
Context switching with 16K - times in microseconds - smaller is better
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2proc/16k 4proc/16k 8proc/16k 16prc/16k 32prc/16k 64prc/16k 96prc/16k
kernel ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch
2.5.68 7.46 8.19 8.04 8.49 13.66 37.52 46.99
2.5.68-mm2 10.50 11.46 11.78 11.61 11.89 15.26 24.91
Context switching with 32K - times in microseconds - smaller is better
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2proc/32k 4proc/32k 8proc/32k 16prc/32k 32prc/32k 64prc/32k 96prc/32k
kernel ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch
2.5.68 12.690 13.520 13.856 19.877 52.473 81.259 83.397
2.5.68-mm2 17.419 17.285 17.212 17.358 20.044 46.069 75.088
Context switching with 64K - times in microseconds - smaller is better
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2proc/64k 4proc/64k 8proc/64k 16prc/64k 32prc/64k 64prc/64k 96prc/64k
kernel ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch ctx swtch
2.5.68 23.03 24.71 34.03 105.06 155.47 156.37 156.29
2.5.68-mm2 27.81 27.97 28.03 33.67 79.36 154.14 172.09
2.5.68 has lower latency in the local communcation tests.
*Local* Communication latencies in microseconds - smaller is better
-------------------------------------------------------------------
kernel Pipe AF/Unix UDP RPC/UDP TCP RPC/TCP
2.5.68 9.44 14.25 32.0856 60.1722 39.8264 73.7042
2.5.68-mm2 32.71 48.45 45.4747 65.2766 56.7022 79.7929
*Local* Communication bandwidths in MB/s - bigger is better
-----------------------------------------------------------
File Mmap Bcopy Bcopy Memory Memory
kernel Pipe AF/Unix TCP reread reread (libc) (hand) read write
2.5.68 511.3 546.9 174.0 296.5 363.9 170.3 172.0 364.9 211.9
2.5.68-mm2 493.2 278.0 167.2 289.2 347.8 160.9 163.1 348.1 199.3
*Local* More Communication bandwidths in MB/s - bigger is better
----------------------------------------------------------------
File Mmap Aligned Partial Partial Partial
OS open open Bcopy Bcopy Mmap Mmap
close close (libc) (hand) write rd/wrt HTTP
2.5.68 299.0 286.0 167.8 182.5 212.2 212.7 10.10
2.5.68-mm2 291.9 277.5 159.7 172.4 201.2 200.5 9.82
Memory latencies in nanoseconds - smaller is better
---------------------------------------------------
kernel Mhz L1 $ L2 $ Main mem
2.5.68 698 4.35 13.06 165.3
2.5.68-mm2 698 4.33 13.00 173.1
tiobench-0.3.3
Unit information
================
File size = 8192 megabytes
Blk Size = 4096 bytes
Rate = megabytes per second
CPU% = percentage of CPU used during the test
Latency = milliseconds
Lat% = percent of requests that took longer than X seconds
CPU Eff = Rate divided by CPU% - throughput per cpu load
One notable difference between -mm2 and 2.5.68 is the CPU% as
thread count goes up. -mm2 uses less CPU as thread count rises,
and 2.5.68 uses more. 2.5.68 keeps sequential read throughput
high as threads increase.
Sequential Reads ext2
Num Avg Maximum Lat% Lat% CPU
Kernel Thr Rate (CPU%) Latency Latency >2s >10s Eff
------------- --- ------------------------------------------------------------
2.5.68 1 28.77 13.23% 0.405 592.14 0.00000 0.00000 217
2.5.68-mm2 1 28.77 13.80% 0.404 659.18 0.00000 0.00000 208
2.5.68 8 36.65 18.04% 2.542 945.37 0.00000 0.00000 203
2.5.68-mm2 8 23.96 11.15% 3.810 1219.85 0.00000 0.00000 215
2.5.68 16 30.56 14.94% 6.080 1224.19 0.00000 0.00000 204
2.5.68-mm2 16 20.19 9.39% 8.953 2456.76 0.00000 0.00000 215
2.5.68 32 27.74 13.84% 13.376 1498.48 0.00000 0.00000 200
2.5.68-mm2 32 20.15 9.50% 16.728 4424.53 0.00000 0.00000 212
2.5.68 64 28.47 14.54% 25.294 6204.46 0.00005 0.00000 196
2.5.68-mm2 64 19.54 9.40% 32.600 12986.20 0.04410 0.00000 208
2.5.68 128 29.87 14.99% 41.715 17752.22 0.10242 0.00000 199
2.5.68-mm2 128 19.28 9.21% 63.638 57459.95 1.27239 0.01006 209
2.5.68 256 34.10 16.88% 64.697 51122.80 1.16358 0.01163 202
2.5.68-mm2 256 18.84 8.96% 125.350 164470.88 1.43795 0.14148 210
Random Reads throughput on ext2 is a lot higher on 2.5.68. -mm2 has a bump in
latency as thread count gets very high.
Num Avg Maximum Lat% Lat% CPU
Kernel Thr Rate (CPU%) Latency Latency >2s >10s Eff
------------- --- ------------------------------------------------------------
2.5.68 1 0.84 0.75% 14.003 120.98 0.00000 0.00000 111
2.5.68-mm2 1 0.95 0.88% 12.383 121.84 0.00000 0.00000 108
2.5.68 8 4.56 4.29% 19.193 122.64 0.00000 0.00000 106
2.5.68-mm2 8 0.96 0.85% 95.108 715.00 0.00000 0.00000 113
2.5.68 16 4.34 3.95% 40.724 212.21 0.00000 0.00000 110
2.5.68-mm2 16 0.99 0.80% 178.652 1203.69 0.00000 0.00000 123
2.5.68 32 3.28 3.40% 98.453 335.85 0.00000 0.00000 96
2.5.68-mm2 32 0.94 0.76% 357.853 2151.68 0.00000 0.00000 124
2.5.68 64 4.20 3.87% 137.963 647.04 0.00000 0.00000 108
2.5.68-mm2 64 0.91 0.79% 677.313 3973.72 0.00000 0.00000 115
2.5.68 128 4.18 4.03% 245.390 1693.66 0.00000 0.00000 104
2.5.68-mm2 128 0.90 0.76% 1275.112 7329.02 11.84476 0.00000 119
2.5.68 256 4.96 4.47% 285.231 6121.11 0.78125 0.00000 111
2.5.68-mm2 256 0.86 0.86% 2160.203 40955.72 32.13542 3.67187 99
For Sequential Writes on ext2, -mm2 has higher throughput and lower latency.
Num Avg Maximum Lat% Lat% CPU
Kernel Thr Rate (CPU%) Latency Latency >2s >10s Eff
------------- --- ------------------------------------------------------------
2.5.68 1 55.43 41.59% 0.173 3228.31 0.00000 0.00000 133
2.5.68-mm2 1 57.78 43.13% 0.164 3055.50 0.00000 0.00000 134
2.5.68 8 30.83 30.28% 2.473 21372.39 0.05684 0.00000 102
2.5.68-mm2 8 32.13 33.00% 2.281 20425.81 0.05011 0.00000 97
2.5.68 16 29.02 30.14% 4.886 36841.82 0.08054 0.00024 96
2.5.68-mm2 16 30.26 32.67% 4.616 33532.37 0.07949 0.00020 93
2.5.68 32 26.93 32.35% 9.834 76337.91 0.10024 0.03682 83
2.5.68-mm2 32 28.08 33.27% 9.433 75278.98 0.09423 0.01369 84
2.5.68 64 25.72 33.33% 19.158 134891.94 0.14043 0.07386 77
2.5.68-mm2 64 28.50 36.25% 18.455 133508.81 0.11492 0.06619 79
2.5.68 128 25.85 34.97% 35.961 266123.63 0.22740 0.09542 74
2.5.68-mm2 128 28.69 37.41% 33.453 217356.72 0.21301 0.08387 77
2.5.68 256 29.80 43.31% 60.387 463540.28 0.43515 0.12388 69
2.5.68-mm2 256 29.84 43.63% 60.796 404468.07 0.54049 0.11292 68
-mm2 does better with random writes.
Random Writes ext2
Num Avg Maximum Lat% Lat% CPU
Kernel Thr Rate (CPU%) Latency Latency >2s >10s Eff
------------- --- ------------------------------------------------------------
2.5.68 1 2.86 2.73% 1.059 60.94 0.00000 0.00000 105
2.5.68-mm2 1 4.48 3.94% 0.077 22.02 0.00000 0.00000 114
2.5.68 8 3.73 4.39% 1.176 81.25 0.00000 0.00000 85
2.5.68-mm2 8 4.09 3.91% 1.984 488.24 0.00000 0.00000 104
2.5.68 16 3.69 4.21% 1.872 189.26 0.00000 0.00000 88
2.5.68-mm2 16 4.00 4.45% 3.510 969.07 0.00000 0.00000 90
2.5.68 32 3.71 4.89% 2.102 352.52 0.00000 0.00000 76
2.5.68-mm2 32 4.03 5.62% 4.660 1455.09 0.00000 0.00000 72
2.5.68 64 3.71 5.68% 2.266 701.86 0.00000 0.00000 65
2.5.68-mm2 64 4.26 7.39% 2.334 1483.77 0.00000 0.00000 58
2.5.68 128 3.79 6.87% 1.343 1042.66 0.00000 0.00000 55
2.5.68-mm2 128 4.35 8.14% 0.853 275.49 0.00000 0.00000 53
2.5.68 256 3.79 6.70% 0.304 79.07 0.00000 0.00000 57
2.5.68-mm2 256 4.36 8.87% 2.487 3519.76 0.00000 0.00000 49
bonnie++-1.02c random seek test on ext2 supports the tiobench random write
result.
Sequential Output ------------------ ----- Random -----
------ Block ----- ---- Rewrite ---- ----- Seeks -----
Kernel Size MB/sec %CPU Eff MB/sec %CPU Eff /sec %CPU Eff
2.5.68 8192 68.62 53.3 129 15.92 17.0 94 502.5 3.00 16750
2.5.68-mm2 8192 71.61 57.0 126 17.52 19.0 92 203.9 1.00 20393
--
Randy Hron
http://home.earthlink.net/~rwhron/kernel/bigbox.html
next reply other threads:[~2003-04-25 22:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-04-25 23:09 rwhron [this message]
2003-04-25 23:25 ` [BENCHMARK] 2.5.68 and 2.5.68-mm2 Andrew Morton
2003-04-26 1:58 rwhron
2003-04-26 2:20 ` Nick Piggin
2003-04-26 3:11 ` Nick Piggin
2003-04-28 21:58 rwhron
2003-04-30 0:59 rwhron
2003-05-01 18:10 ` Nick Piggin
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=20030425230939.GA2281@rushmore \
--to=rwhron@earthlink.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).