From: jogi@planetzork.ping.de
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Performance of 2.4.10-pre12aa1
Date: 20 Sep 2001 23:42:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20010920234211.B2059@planetzork.spacenet> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 321 bytes --]
Hello,
I forgot to CC linux-kernel so here comes my performance measurements
(make -j50 bzImage modules) which show that 2.4.10-pre12aa1 is faster
than 2.4.9-ac12 and way faster than 2.4.10-pre10.
Regards,
Jogi
--
Well, yeah ... I suppose there's no point in getting greedy, is there?
<< Calvin & Hobbes >>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 1917 bytes --]
To: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
Subject: Performance of 2.4.10-pre12aa1
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 14:18:15 +0200
Message-ID: <20010920141815.A8193@planetzork.spacenet>
Hello Andrea,
I did some kernel compiling test (make -j50 bzImage modules) and
2.4.10-pre12aa1 is clearly the fastest kernel on my system:
2.4.10-pre12aa1:
Command being timed: "sh -c make dep clean>logfile-2.4.10-pre12aa1-1000985915 2>&1 && make -j50 bzImage modules>>logfile-2.4.10-pre12aa1-1000985915 2>&1"
User time (seconds): 271.15
System time (seconds): 22.80
Percent of CPU this job got: 85%
Elapsed (wall clock) time (h:mm:ss or m:ss): 5:43.77
Major (requiring I/O) page faults: 1219007
Minor (reclaiming a frame) page faults: 1068599
2.4.9-ac12:
Command being timed: "sh -c make dep clean>logfile-2.4.9-ac12-1000986647 2>&1 && make -j50 bzImage modules>>logfile-2.4.9-ac12-1000986647 2>&1"
User time (seconds): 264.49
System time (seconds): 24.53
Percent of CPU this job got: 79%
Elapsed (wall clock) time (h:mm:ss or m:ss): 6:05.27
Major (requiring I/O) page faults: 1196824
Minor (reclaiming a frame) page faults: 1155328
2.4.10-pre10:
Command being timed: "sh -c make dep clean>logfile-2.4.10-pre10-1000987167 2>&1 && make -j50 bzImage modules>>logfile-2.4.10-pre10-1000987167 2>&1"
User time (seconds): 265.81
System time (seconds): 24.04
Percent of CPU this job got: 54%
Elapsed (wall clock) time (h:mm:ss or m:ss): 8:55.74
Major (requiring I/O) page faults: 1221867
Minor (reclaiming a frame) page faults: 1171864
Although 2.4.9-ac12 is not that far behind. I think the skipping is
caused by some reiserfs problems which show more if your vm changes
are applied.
Regards,
Jogi
--
Well, yeah ... I suppose there's no point in getting greedy, is there?
<< Calvin & Hobbes >>
reply other threads:[~2001-09-20 21:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=20010920234211.B2059@planetzork.spacenet \
--to=jogi@planetzork.ping.de \
--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®