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
next prev parent 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).