From: Peter Rasmussen (udgaard) <plr@udgaard.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: plr@udgaard.com
Subject: Re: How can I help with VIA MVP3 problems?
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 00:29:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200105122229.AAA03353@udgaard.com> (raw)
I'm not on the list so please also reply directly to me. I may soon be done :-)
I was made aware of the following:
>On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 07:37:23PM +0200, Peter Rasmussen wrote:
>> 2.4.4-ac8 doing "time make dep clean bzImage modules modules_install" :
>>
>> udgaard:/usr/src/linux# cat /proc/meminfo
>> total: used: free: shared: buffers: cached:
>> Mem: 328101888 317947904 10153984 0 67219456 130404352
>> Swap: 542859264 0 542859264
>>
>> ======================== 2.2.16 ===========================
>>
>> udgaard:~$ cat /proc/meminfo
>> total: used: free: shared: buffers: cached:
>> Mem: 65789952 60755968 5033984 28221440 7872512 24219648
>> Swap: 542859264 1368064 541491200
>
>2.2.16 only recognizes 64 Mb? That makes all of the numbers less
>interesting, I guess.
>
I hadn't noticed that before and it helped me improving the test. By ensuring
that the two kernels looked at the same size RAM I found that the performance
numbers were the same.
However, I then now wonder why my system gets slower when increasing the amount of main RAM?
Is it a RAM caching problem in the chipset or the board similar to the braindead
Intel VX430 chipset that couldn't handle more than 64MB? I hope not, but I can't
see any other reason, even though I thought such problems were of the past?
Please let me know if you know something about it.
I found the following relations with regard to memory settings. As the 2.2 and
2.4 kernels I use performed the same with little RAM (64MB), I stayed with the
2.4.4-ac8 for simplicity's sake.
A 2.4.4-ac8 kernel build:
2.4.4-ac8 with 64MB RAM mem-setting: real 8m26.180s
user 7m5.340s
sys 0m39.430s
2.4.4-ac8 with 128MB RAM mem-setting: real 8m20.902s
user 7m8.810s
sys 0m39.800s
2.4.4-ac8 with 160MB RAM mem-setting: real 8m21.653s
user 7m13.830s
sys 0m37.840s
2.4.4-ac8 with 192MB RAM mem-setting: real 9m48.632s
user 8m39.270s
sys 0m39.740s
So it seems around here the performance starts to decrease.
I am still puzzled why the shared memory like the following is always zero on
the 2.4 kernels? All I can remember checking it on has it like that, but I can't
find any explanations about it?
udgaard:/usr/src/linux# cat /proc/meminfo
total: used: free: shared: buffers: cached:
Mem: 64135168 63148032 987136 0 2965504 34447360
Swap: 542859264 147456 542711808
Thank you very much,
Peter
next reply other threads:[~2001-05-12 22:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-05-12 22:29 Peter Rasmussen [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-05-12 17:37 How can I help with VIA MVP3 problems? Peter Rasmussen
2001-05-12 22:58 ` Alan Cox
2001-05-11 22:41 Peter Rasmussen
2001-05-11 23:19 ` Alan Cox
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=200105122229.AAA03353@udgaard.com \
--to=plr@udgaard.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.