mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>
To: "'Jeff Garzik'" <jgarzik@pobox.com>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "Jens Axboe" <axboe@suse.de>
Subject: RE: kernel performance update - 2.6.14
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 17:04:04 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200510290004.j9T044g27679@unix-os.sc.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4362BA30.2020504@pobox.com>

Jeff Garzik wrote on Friday, October 28, 2005 4:54 PM
> Chen, Kenneth W wrote:
> > Kernel performance data for 2.6.14 (released yesterday) is updated at:
> > http://kernel-perf.sourceforge.net
> > 
> > As expected, results are within run variation compares to 2.6.14-rc5.
> > No significant deviation found compare to 2.6.14-rc5
> 
> Do I read this correctly:  according to your benchmarks, fileio-noop and 
> fileio-cfq are down some 20% or more, across all machine configurations, 
> since 2.6.9? In the 4P configuration, dbench-{noop,as} both seem to have 
> regressed as well.

Yes, you did read that correctly.  For some benchmarks, these numbers
can't be directly interpreted as a regression since we may not have
the correct configuration (either wrong setup or default parameters
aren't suitable for the machine that size).  For example, dbench is
one of them.  We are working on characterize these workloads to make
sure our setup is meaningful.

We are also looking through fileio data.  I think we understand the drop
in fileio-noop.  But I want to have more definitive understanding before
claim a real regression.  Same thing with cfq.

- Ken


  parent reply	other threads:[~2005-10-29  0:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-10-28 23:44 Chen, Kenneth W
2005-10-28 23:54 ` Jeff Garzik
2005-10-28 22:43   ` Jeff V. Merkey
2005-10-29  2:49     ` Nick Piggin
2005-10-29  3:06       ` jmerkey
2005-10-29  3:08         ` jmerkey
2005-10-29  3:15           ` jmerkey
2005-10-29  8:38           ` Nick Piggin
2005-10-29  0:04   ` Chen, Kenneth W [this message]
2005-10-29  0:19 ` Felix Oxley
2005-10-29  0:29   ` Felix Oxley
2005-10-29  0:42     ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-10-29 11:17       ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2005-10-29  0:29   ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-11-08  0:04 Chen, Tim C

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=200510290004.j9T044g27679@unix-os.sc.intel.com \
    --to=kenneth.w.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=axboe@suse.de \
    --cc=jgarzik@pobox.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®