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, 9 Oct 2002 05:20:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 05:20:36 -0400 Received: from c16688.thoms1.vic.optusnet.com.au ([210.49.244.54]:65489 "EHLO kolivas.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 05:20:34 -0400 Message-ID: <1034155574.3da3f636b97df@kolivas.net> Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 19:26:14 +1000 From: Con Kolivas To: linux kernel mailing list Cc: Andrew Morton Subject: [BENCHMARK] 2.5.41-mm1 with contest MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Here are the contest (http://contest.kolivas.net) benchmark results for 2.5.41-mm1 noload: Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio 2.4.19 [3] 67.7 98 0 0 1.01 2.5.38 [3] 72.0 93 0 0 1.07 2.5.39 [2] 72.2 93 0 0 1.07 2.5.40 [1] 72.5 93 0 0 1.08 2.5.40-mm2 [1] 72.2 93 0 0 1.07 2.5.41 [1] 73.8 93 0 0 1.10 2.5.41-mm1 [3] 73.3 92 0 0 1.09 process_load: Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio 2.4.19 [3] 106.5 59 112 43 1.59 2.5.38 [3] 89.5 74 34 28 1.33 2.5.39 [2] 91.2 73 36 28 1.36 2.5.40 [2] 82.8 80 25 23 1.23 2.5.40-mm2 [1] 98.0 69 45 33 1.46 2.5.41 [1] 91.1 73 38 30 1.36 2.5.41-mm1 [3] 88.8 75 32 27 1.32 io_load: Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio 2.4.19 [3] 492.6 14 38 10 7.33 2.5.38 [1] 4000.0 1 500 1 59.55 2.5.39 [2] 423.9 18 30 11 6.31 2.5.40 [1] 315.7 25 22 10 4.70 2.5.40-mm2 [2] 208.0 38 12 10 3.10 2.5.41 [2] 607.5 13 47 12 9.04 2.5.41-mm1 [3] 307.7 26 18 10 4.58 Significantly better than the new IO based choking in 2.5.41. mem_load: Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio 2.4.19 [3] 100.0 72 33 3 1.49 2.5.38 [3] 107.3 70 34 3 1.60 2.5.39 [2] 103.1 72 31 3 1.53 2.5.40 [2] 102.5 72 31 3 1.53 2.5.40-mm2 [2] 165.1 44 38 2 2.46 2.5.41 [1] 101.6 73 30 3 1.51 2.5.41-mm1 [3] 144.6 50 37 2 2.15 Subtle differences only between 2.5.40-mm2 and 2.5.41-mm1 except for mem_load which shows some relaxing of the aggressive swap avoiding in 2.5.40-mm2, but still significantly longer than 2.5.41. Experimental loads: read_load: Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio 2.4.19 [2] 134.1 54 14 5 2.00 2.5.38 [2] 100.5 76 9 5 1.50 2.5.39 [2] 101.3 74 14 6 1.51 2.5.40 [1] 101.5 73 13 5 1.51 2.5.40-mm2 [1] 102.7 75 7 4 1.53 2.5.41 [1] 101.1 75 7 4 1.51 2.5.41-mm1 [3] 106.8 70 5 3 1.59 Slight drop off here, with longer kernel compile time despite doing less load work. lslr_load: Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio 2.4.19 [1] 89.8 77 1 20 1.34 2.5.38 [1] 99.1 71 1 20 1.48 2.5.39 [1] 101.3 70 2 24 1.51 2.5.40 [1] 97.0 72 1 21 1.44 2.5.40-mm2 [1] 94.3 75 1 21 1.40 2.5.41 [1] 93.6 75 1 18 1.39 2.5.41-mm1 [3] 96.8 72 1 21 1.44 tarc_load: Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio 2.4.19 [2] 106.5 70 1 8 1.59 2.5.38 [1] 97.2 79 1 6 1.45 2.5.39 [1] 91.8 83 1 6 1.37 2.5.40 [1] 96.9 80 1 6 1.44 2.5.40-mm2 [1] 91.9 82 1 6 1.37 2.5.41 [1] 93.3 81 1 6 1.39 2.5.41-mm1 [3] 91.6 81 1 5 1.36 tarx_load: Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio 2.4.19 [1] 132.4 55 2 9 1.97 2.5.38 [1] 120.5 63 2 8 1.79 2.5.39 [1] 108.3 69 1 6 1.61 2.5.40 [1] 110.7 68 1 6 1.65 2.5.40-mm2 [1] 188.1 39 3 7 2.80 2.5.41 [2] 138.8 53 2 8 2.07 2.5.41-mm1 [3] 188.4 43 2 7 2.80 Con