linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Con Kolivas <conman@kolivas.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>
Subject: Re: Useful fork info? WAS Re: [BENCHMARK] fork_load module tested for contest
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 10:25:47 +0200 (CEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0209261023500.2944-100000@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1033009036.3d92778cee9b9@kolivas.net>


On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Con Kolivas wrote:

> fork_load:
> Kernel                  Time            CPU             Ratio
> 2.4.19                  97.11           67%             1.33
> 2.4.19-ck7              72.34           92%             0.99
> 2.5.38                  75.32           92%             1.03
> 2.5.38-mm2              74.99           92%             1.03
> 
> 2.4.19: Children forked: 32750
> 2.4.19-ck7: Children forked: 6477
> 2.5.38: Children forked: 5545
> 2.5.38-mm2: Children forked: 5351
> 
> You can see clearly repeatedly forking a new process significantly slows
> down compile time for 2.4.19 but not the O(1) based kernels. However,
> the number of processes that are forked is significantly reduced.

shouldnt the CPU load be 100% for such a test? If it isnt then perhaps
some other thing factors in. VM load? And i dont understand how a faster
kernel forks less children in the end. Perhaps the test is hitting some
sort of resource limit which has a different default in 2.5?

	Ingo


  reply	other threads:[~2002-09-26  8:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-09-25 14:42 Con Kolivas
2002-09-25 14:52 ` Rik van Riel
2002-09-25 22:14 ` Cliff White
2002-09-25 23:07   ` Con Kolivas
2002-09-26  2:57 ` Useful fork info? WAS " Con Kolivas
2002-09-26  8:25   ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2002-09-26 14:42     ` Rik van Riel
2002-09-26  8:36   ` William Lee Irwin III

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=Pine.LNX.4.44.0209261023500.2944-100000@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=conman@kolivas.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=riel@conectiva.com.br \
    --subject='Re: Useful fork info? WAS Re: [BENCHMARK] fork_load module tested for contest' \
    /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

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).