From: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: hugh@veritas.com, andrea@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Benchmarking objrmap under memory pressure
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 17:38:02 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <120240000.1081903082@flay> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040413005111.71c7716d.akpm@osdl.org>
>> UP Athlon 2100+ with 512Mb of RAM. Rebooted clean before each test
>> then did "make clean; make vmlinux; make clean". Then I timed a
>> "make -j 256 vmlinux" to get some testing under mem pressure.
>>
>> I was trying to test the overhead of objrmap under memory pressure,
>> but it seems it's actually distinctly negative overhead - rather pleasing
>> really ;-)
>>
>> 2.6.5
>> 225.18user 30.05system 6:33.72elapsed 64%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
>> 0inputs+0outputs (37590major+2604444minor)pagefaults 0swaps
>>
>> 2.6.5-anon_mm
>> 224.53user 26.00system 5:29.08elapsed 76%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
>> 0inputs+0outputs (29127major+2577211minor)pagefaults 0swaps
>
> A four second reduction in system time caused a one minute reduction in
> runtime? Pull the other one ;)
>
> Average of five runs, please...
You're right - it's rather variable. Still doesn't look bad though.
2.6.5
Average elapsed = 6:11
224.92user 30.15system 5:44.19elapsed 74%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
225.04user 30.23system 6:02.49elapsed 70%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
225.28user 29.60system 5:48.22elapsed 73%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
225.81user 31.75system 6:42.38elapsed 64%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
225.23user 30.20system 6:40.48elapsed 63%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
2.6.5-anon_mm
Average elapsed = 5:43
224.34user 25.43system 4:51.23elapsed 85%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
224.23user 25.93system 5:00.79elapsed 83%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
224.39user 26.36system 5:37.71elapsed 74%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
225.65user 27.13system 6:28.00elapsed 65%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
225.14user 27.26system 6:39.61elapsed 63%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
I've kicked off the -aa tree tests - will post them later tonight.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-04-14 0:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-04-13 7:39 Benchmarking objrmap under memory pressure Martin J. Bligh
2004-04-13 7:51 ` Andrew Morton
2004-04-13 7:55 ` Martin J. Bligh
2004-04-13 21:59 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-14 0:38 ` Martin J. Bligh [this message]
2004-04-14 16:27 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-14 16:42 ` Martin J. Bligh
2004-04-14 17:11 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-14 17:48 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-04-14 23:39 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-15 10:21 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-04-15 13:22 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-15 13:45 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-04-15 14:08 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-15 16:23 ` Bill Davidsen
2004-04-15 16:48 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-04-22 19:54 ` Bill Davidsen
2004-04-22 21:26 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-04-14 18:11 ` Bill Davidsen
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=120240000.1081903082@flay \
--to=mbligh@aracnet.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=andrea@suse.de \
--cc=hugh@veritas.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.