From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 18:21:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 18:21:44 -0400 Received: from hermes.domdv.de ([193.102.202.1]:60430 "EHLO zeus.domdv.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 18:21:34 -0400 Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.4.6-3 on Linux X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 00:20:57 +0200 (CEST) Organization: D.O.M. Datenverarbeitung GmbH From: Andreas Steinmetz To: Linus Torvalds Subject: RE: Linux-2.4.10-pre10 Cc: Kernel Mailing List Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > The new (simpler) code should be a lot less random. But it will probably > need a few tweaks. It would be very interesting to hear about specific > loads that show problems (or loads that are good, of course). > OK, comparing 2.4.10pre4 to 2.4.10pre10 there's good news and bad news: 1. Good News ------------ Please don't wonder about memory size, this is a laptop with 32MB on board and two 128MB modules. /proc/meminfo on 2.4.10pre4 after boot and then after running aide: total: used: free: shared: buffers: cached: Mem: 292478976 149729280 142749696 0 14004224 78467072 Swap: 1071087616 0 1071087616 MemTotal: 285624 kB MemFree: 139404 kB MemShared: 0 kB Buffers: 13676 kB Cached: 76628 kB SwapCached: 0 kB Active: 7672 kB Inact_dirty: 82632 kB Inact_clean: 0 kB Inact_target: 1140 kB HighTotal: 0 kB HighFree: 0 kB LowTotal: 285624 kB LowFree: 139404 kB SwapTotal: 1045984 kB SwapFree: 1045984 kB total: used: free: shared: buffers: cached: Mem: 292478976 280997888 11481088 0 25620480 224792576 Swap: 1071087616 35487744 1035599872 MemTotal: 285624 kB MemFree: 11212 kB MemShared: 0 kB Buffers: 25020 kB Cached: 208300 kB SwapCached: 11224 kB Active: 163008 kB Inact_dirty: 80640 kB Inact_clean: 896 kB Inact_target: 6704 kB HighTotal: 0 kB HighFree: 0 kB LowTotal: 285624 kB LowFree: 11212 kB SwapTotal: 1045984 kB SwapFree: 1011328 kB /proc/meminfo on 2.4.10pre10 after boot and then after running aide: total: used: free: shared: buffers: cached: Mem: 292581376 172519424 120061952 0 36872192 78290944 Swap: 1071087616 0 1071087616 MemTotal: 285724 kB MemFree: 117248 kB MemShared: 0 kB Buffers: 36008 kB Cached: 76456 kB SwapCached: 0 kB Active: 21104 kB Inact_dirty: 91360 kB Inact_clean: 0 kB Inact_target: 1152 kB HighTotal: 0 kB HighFree: 0 kB LowTotal: 285724 kB LowFree: 117248 kB SwapTotal: 1045984 kB SwapFree: 1045984 kB total: used: free: shared: buffers: cached: Mem: 292581376 280190976 12390400 0 20652032 194973696 Swap: 1071087616 0 1071087616 MemTotal: 285724 kB MemFree: 12100 kB MemShared: 0 kB Buffers: 20168 kB Cached: 190404 kB SwapCached: 0 kB Active: 48096 kB Inact_dirty: 160776 kB Inact_clean: 1700 kB Inact_target: 5592 kB HighTotal: 0 kB HighFree: 0 kB LowTotal: 285724 kB LowFree: 12100 kB SwapTotal: 1045984 kB SwapFree: 1045984 kB 2. Bad News ----------- Average time required for aide run: 2.4.10pre4 230 seconds 2.4.10pre10 323 seconds So an aide run takes additional 93 seconds on pre10 when compared to pre4. There's an odd behaviour back in 2.4.10pre10 that I remember having noticed last in 2.4.7: Any mouse movement causes instant disk activity. This may be initiated by the fact that I'm using gpm and thus /dev/gpmdata (named pipe) to feed mouse input to X as I want to have mouse support when switching to console mode (sometimes cut and paste is really easier using the mouse). In general (though no measurements) I just can confirm the remark on the list that pre10 'feels' more sluggish. There seems to be more disk activity when larger applications are started in general. This fits the reappearance of the mouse problem stated above. Andreas Steinmetz D.O.M. Datenverarbeitung GmbH