Re: [PATCH] fix for VM test9-pre7

Rik van Riel
2000-10-02T15:51:42Z

On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Tom Leete wrote:

> I ran lmbench on test9-pre7 with and without the patch.
>
> Test machine was a slow medium memory UP box:
> Cx586@120Mhz, no optimizations, 56M
>
> I still experience instability on this machine with both the
> patched and vanilla kernel. It usually takes the form of
> sudden total lockups, but on occasion I have seen oops +
> panic at boot.

If you could decode the oops or mail us the panic, we
might find out if this is a VM related problem or not...

> This summary doesn't show any performance advantage to the
> patch, but the detailed plots show that memory access
> latency degrades more gracefully wrt array size.

That's because this benchmark has a very artificial page
access pattern, that doesn't really benefit from any kind
of page replacement. ;)

regards,

Rik
--
"What you're running that piece of shit Gnome?!?!"
-- Miguel de Icaza, UKUUG 2000

http://www.conectiva.com/ http://www.surriel.com/