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
next 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®