mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Con Kolivas <conman@kolivas.net>
To: linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
Subject: [BENCHMARK] 2.5.43-mm2 with contest
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 17:40:38 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1034840438.3dae6976a93fb@kolivas.net> (raw)

Here are the updated benchmarks with contest v0.51 (http://contest.kolivas.net)
showing the change from -mm1 to -mm2. Other results removed for clarity.

noload:
Kernel [runs]           Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.4.18 [3]              71.8    93      0       0       1.01
2.5.43 [2]              74.6    92      0       0       1.04
2.5.43-mm1 [4]          74.9    93      0       0       1.05
2.5.43-mm2 [2]          73.4    93      0       0       1.03

Interesting. This was significant. The slow start that occurs with noload after
a memory flush seems to have been tamed somewhat.

process_load:
Kernel [runs]           Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.43 [2]              99.7    71      44      31      1.40
2.5.43-mm1 [5]          100.4   73      37      28      1.41
2.5.43-mm2 [2]          105.8   71      44      31      1.48

One pathological run removed from -mm1 and 3 removed from -mm2. Don't know why
it's getting stuck doing process_load now and the other 2.5 kernels only do it
at bigger data sizes for process_load. 2.4 doesnt seem to exhibit this at all.

ctar_load:
Kernel [runs]           Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.43 [1]              97.6    79      1       7       1.37
2.5.43-mm1 [3]          94.6    81      1       6       1.32
2.5.43-mm2 [1]          92.3    82      1       5       1.29

xtar_load:
Kernel [runs]           Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.43 [1]              114.9   67      1       7       1.61
2.5.43-mm1 [3]          221.2   46      3       7       3.10
2.5.43-mm2 [2]          171.0   45      2       8       2.39

Improvement

io_load:
Kernel [runs]           Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.43 [1]              578.9   13      45      12      8.11
2.5.43-mm1 [3]          383.0   21      27      11      5.36
2.5.43-mm2 [2]          301.1   26      21      11      4.22

Improvement

read_load:
Kernel [runs]           Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.43 [3]              117.3   64      6       3       1.64
2.5.43-mm1 [3]          104.4   74      7       4       1.46
2.5.43-mm2 [1]          105.7   73      6       4       1.48

list_load:
Kernel [runs]           Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.43 [2]              93.0    76      1       18      1.30
2.5.43-mm1 [3]          97.3    73      0       19      1.36
2.5.43-mm2 [1]          98.9    72      1       23      1.39

mem_load:
Kernel [runs]           Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
2.5.43 [1]              102.0   75      28      2       1.43
2.5.43-mm1 [3]          104.4   71      27      2       1.46
2.5.43-mm2 [2]          106.5   69      27      2       1.49

Removal of per-cpu pages patch does not seem to have been detrimental to contest
benchmarks at least - perhaps this is responsible for the noload being better now?

Con

             reply	other threads:[~2002-10-17  7:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-10-17  7:40 Con Kolivas [this message]
2002-10-17  8:01 ` Andrew Morton
2002-10-17 10:56   ` Con Kolivas

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=1034840438.3dae6976a93fb@kolivas.net \
    --to=conman@kolivas.net \
    --cc=akpm@digeo.com \
    --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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®