From: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
To: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
Subject: Re: 2.5.39-mm1
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 01:01:37 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D9804E1.76C9D4AE@digeo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 735786955.1033347097@[10.10.2.3]
"Martin J. Bligh" wrote:
>
> > I must say that based on a small amount of performance testing the
> > benefits of the cache warmness thing are disappointing. Maybe 1% if
> > you squint. Martin, could you please do a before-and-after on the
> > NUMAQ's, double check that it is actually doing the right thing?
>
> Seems to work just fine:
>
> 2.5.38-mm1 + my original hot/cold code.
> Elapsed: 19.798s User: 191.61s System: 43.322s CPU: 1186.4%
>
> 2.5.39-mm1
> Elapsed: 19.532s User: 192.25s System: 42.642s CPU: 1203.2%
>
> And it's a lot more than 1% for me ;-) About 12% of systime
> on kernel compile, IIRC.
Well that's still a 1% bottom line. But we don't have a
comparison which shows the effects of this patch alone.
Can you patch -R the five patches and retest sometime?
I just get the feeling that it should be doing better.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
To: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
Subject: Re: 2.5.39-mm1
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 01:01:37 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D9804E1.76C9D4AE@digeo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 735786955.1033347097@[10.10.2.3]
"Martin J. Bligh" wrote:
>
> > I must say that based on a small amount of performance testing the
> > benefits of the cache warmness thing are disappointing. Maybe 1% if
> > you squint. Martin, could you please do a before-and-after on the
> > NUMAQ's, double check that it is actually doing the right thing?
>
> Seems to work just fine:
>
> 2.5.38-mm1 + my original hot/cold code.
> Elapsed: 19.798s User: 191.61s System: 43.322s CPU: 1186.4%
>
> 2.5.39-mm1
> Elapsed: 19.532s User: 192.25s System: 42.642s CPU: 1203.2%
>
> And it's a lot more than 1% for me ;-) About 12% of systime
> on kernel compile, IIRC.
Well that's still a 1% bottom line. But we don't have a
comparison which shows the effects of this patch alone.
Can you patch -R the five patches and retest sometime?
I just get the feeling that it should be doing better.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-09-30 7:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-09-29 20:26 2.5.39-mm1 Andrew Morton
2002-09-29 20:26 ` 2.5.39-mm1 Andrew Morton
2002-09-30 1:24 ` 2.5.39-mm1 Ed Tomlinson
2002-09-30 1:24 ` 2.5.39-mm1 Ed Tomlinson
2002-09-30 1:35 ` 2.5.39-mm1 Andrew Morton
2002-09-30 1:35 ` 2.5.39-mm1 Andrew Morton
2002-09-30 7:51 ` 2.5.39-mm1 Martin J. Bligh
2002-09-30 7:51 ` 2.5.39-mm1 Martin J. Bligh
2002-09-30 8:01 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2002-09-30 8:01 ` 2.5.39-mm1 Andrew Morton
2002-09-30 16:29 ` 2.5.39-mm1 Martin J. Bligh
2002-09-30 16:29 ` 2.5.39-mm1 Martin J. Bligh
2002-09-30 18:24 ` 2.5.39-mm1 Andrew Morton
2002-09-30 18:24 ` 2.5.39-mm1 Andrew Morton
2002-10-01 3:58 ` 2.5.39-mm1 Maneesh Soni
2002-10-01 3:51 ` 2.5.39-mm1 Andrew Morton
2002-10-01 4:13 ` 2.5.39-mm1 Maneesh Soni
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=3D9804E1.76C9D4AE@digeo.com \
--to=akpm@digeo.com \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mbligh@aracnet.com \
/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.