From: Peter Williams <pwil3058@bigpond.net.au>
To: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
Cc: Phy Prabab <phyprabab@yahoo.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: slow down in 2.6 vs 2.4
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 14:41:07 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <40C694E3.7030509@bigpond.net.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1086744927.40c6695f9c361@vds.kolivas.org>
Con Kolivas wrote:
> Hi Phy
>
> You said:
> Over the last two days I have been struggling with
> understanding why 2.6.x kernel is slower than
> 2.4.21/23 kernels. I think I have a test case which
> demostrates this issue.
> make times:
>
> 2.4.21:
> 323.68user 56.07system 6:35.77elapsed 95%CPU
> (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
> 0inputs+0outputs (3138783major+3818347minor)pagefaults
> 0swaps
>
> 2.6.7-rc3-s63 (SPA scheduler):
> 334.01user 69.86system 7:01.47elapsed 95%CPU
> (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
> 0inputs+0outputs (13301major+6931745minor)pagefaults
> 0swaps
>
> 2.6.7-rc3:
> 336.17user 68.41system 7:02.47elapsed 95%CPU
> (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
> 0inputs+0outputs (13301major+6931745minor)pagefaults
> 0swaps
>
>
> ----
> Your 2.4 compile is showing a massive number of major page faults.
Seems to be roughly the same total number of page faults in all three
cases but there's been a big shift from majors to minors for the 2.6
kernels which I would have thought would improve performance?
Peter
--
Dr Peter Williams pwil3058@bigpond.net.au
"Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious."
-- Ambrose Bierce
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-06-09 4:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-06-09 1:35 slow down in 2.6 vs 2.4 Con Kolivas
2004-06-09 4:10 ` Phy Prabab
2004-06-09 19:34 ` Paul Dickson
2004-06-09 4:41 ` Peter Williams [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-06-09 3:35 Phy Prabab
2004-06-09 19:16 ` Clint Byrum
2004-06-09 20:15 ` 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=40C694E3.7030509@bigpond.net.au \
--to=pwil3058@bigpond.net.au \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=phyprabab@yahoo.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.