From: Patrick McFarland <unknown@panax.com>
To: Mark Hahn <hahn@physics.mcmaster.ca>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [unknown@panax.com: Re: Which is better at vm, and why? 2.2 or 2.4]
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 14:06:38 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20011013140638.J249@localhost> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1473 bytes --]
Heh, well 2.2 actually could get away with it. I think I remember seeing the system size (reported by make bzimage) to me 2 megs vs 2.4's 4 megs. Or maybe I'm just imagining things.
On 13-Oct-2001, Mark Hahn wrote:
> > Now, the great kernel hacker, ac, said that 2.2 is better at vm in low
> > memory situations than 2.4 is. Why is this? Why hasnt someone fixed the 2.4
> > code?
>
> not to slight TGKH AC, but he's also the 2.2 maintainer; perhaps there's
> some paternal protectiveness there ;)
>
> my test for VM is to compile a kernel on my crappy old BP6 with mem=64m;
> I use a dedicated partition with a fresh ext2, unpack the same source tree,
> make -j2 7 times, drop 1 outlier, and average:
>
> 2.2.19: 584.462user 57.492system 385.112elapsed 166.5%CPU
> 2.4.12: 582.318user 40.535system 337.093elapsed 184.5%CPU
>
> notice that elapsed is noticably faster even than the 1+17 second
> benefit to user and system times. Rik's VM seems to be slightly
> slower on this test. with 128M, there's much less diference for
> any of the versions (and I don't have the patience for <64M.)
>
> regards, mark hahn.
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
--
Patrick "Diablo-D3" McFarland || unknown@panax.com
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
reply other threads:[~2001-10-13 18:06 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=20011013140638.J249@localhost \
--to=unknown@panax.com \
--cc=hahn@physics.mcmaster.ca \
--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.