All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Martin J. Bligh" <fletch@aracnet.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: kernbench-16 on 2.5.59 vs 2.5.59-mm6
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 09:36:52 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <375110000.1043689012@titus> (raw)

This test does a make -j X vmlinux on a 2.4.17 kernel compile with
a very large config set. X is 16 times the number of cpus. This is
on a 16-way NUMA-Q so we end up with a make -j256 (it's fastest
with about 1.5 * num_cpus), but this test puts more stress on the 
kernel. 

None of the other tests I ran showed anything very interesting.
(the new NUMA sched stuff from Ingo seems to give mild degredations
in -mjb ... probably needs some more tuning).

Going from 59 to 59-mm6, I get:

Kernbench-16:
                                   Elapsed        User      System         CPU
                        2.5.59       47.45      568.02      143.17     1498.17
                    2.5.59-mm6       47.18      567.15      138.62     1495.50

Summary: Scheduler stuff seems like a wash (schedule -> do_schedule). 
Seems to be some sort of rearrangement of the dcache stuff which 
appears to be mildly beneficial (what's going in there?). 
current_kernel_time seems to be less than half the cost, I'm assuming 
the new frlock kernel time stuff is doing that. This workload doesn't 
stress that very much, so I'll find a better test for that one ...

2.5.59: 1657 current_kernel_time
2.5.59-mm6: 747 current_kernel_time

diffprofile (+ gets worse, - gets better).

2023 do_schedule
485 dentry_open
289 .text.lock.file_table
132 clear_page_tables
131 pgd_ctor
113 vma_merge
75 kmap_atomic
62 get_empty_filp
51 can_vma_merge_after
-52 dget_locked
-54 vfs_follow_link
-55 kmem_cache_free
-66 buffered_rmqueue
-74 __copy_to_user_ll
-94 page_add_rmap
-102 fd_install
-110 __copy_from_user_ll
-117 __d_lookup
-157 do_generic_mapping_read
-188 path_lookup
-273 .text.lock.dec_and_lock
-275 file_ra_state_init
-283 do_anonymous_page
-331 pfn_to_nid
-405 page_remove_rmap
-413 pgd_alloc
-427 vm_enough_memory
-910 current_kernel_time
-1222 .text.lock.namei
-2076 total
-2133 schedule


             reply	other threads:[~2003-01-27 17:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-01-27 17:36 Martin J. Bligh [this message]
2003-01-28  0:22 ` kernbench-16 on 2.5.59 vs 2.5.59-mm6 William Lee Irwin III
     [not found] <20030127174015$5cfa@gated-at.bofh.it>
2003-01-27 18:48 ` Dipankar Sarma

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=375110000.1043689012@titus \
    --to=fletch@aracnet.com \
    --cc=akpm@digeo.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.