RE: lmbench results for 2.4 and 2.5 -- updated results

["Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Linus Torvalds [mailto:torvalds@transmeta.com] 
> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 12:40 AM
> To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: lmbench results for 2.4 and 2.5 -- updated results
> 
> 
> >--page fault (is this significant?)
> 
> I don't think so, there's something strange with the lmbench pagefault
> tests, it only has one significant digit of accuracy, and I don't even
> know what it is testing. Because of the single lack of precision, it's
> hard to tell what the real change is.
> 

This single digit accuracy is coming from a minor integer division bug
in lmbench.
Appended LMbench patch should resolve it.

Thanks,
-Venkatesh

--- LMbench/src/lat_pagefault.c.org	Mon Mar 24 10:40:46 2003
+++ LMbench/src/lat_pagefault.c	Mon Mar 24 10:54:34 2003
@@ -67,5 +67,5 @@
 		n++;
 	}
 	use_int(sum);
-	fprintf(stderr, "Pagefaults on %s: %d usecs\n", file, usecs/n);
+	fprintf(stderr, "Pagefaults on %s: %f usecs\n", file, (1.0 *
usecs) / n);
 }