From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: <4t153d$r2dpi@azsmga001.ch.intel.com> From: "Chen, Kenneth W" Subject: RE: Lockless page cache test results Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 22:39:30 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <20060426194623.GD9211@suse.de> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: 'Jens Axboe' , 'Nick Piggin' Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 'Nick Piggin' , 'Andrew Morton' , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: Jens Axboe wrote on Wednesday, April 26, 2006 12:46 PM > > It's interesting, single threaded performance is down a little. Is > > this significant? In some other results you showed me with 3 splices > > each running on their own file (ie. no tree_lock contention), lockless > > looked slightly faster on the same machine. > > I can do the same numbers on a 2-way em64t for comparison, that should > get us a little better coverage. I throw the lockless patch and Jens splice-bench into our benchmark harness, here are the numbers I collected, on the following hardware: (1) 2P Intel Xeon, 3.4 GHz/HT, 2M L2 (2) 4P Intel Xeon, 3.0 GHz/HT, 8M L3 (3) 4P Intel Xeon, 3.0 GHz/DC/HT, 2M L2 (per core) Here are the graph: (1) 2P Intel Xeon, 3.4 GHz/HT, 2M L2 http://kernel-perf.sourceforge.net/splice/2P-3.4Ghz.png (2) 4P Intel Xeon, 3.0 GHz/HT, 8M L3 http://kernel-perf.sourceforge.net/splice/4P-3.0Ghz.png (3) 4P Intel Xeon, 3.0 GHz/DC/HT, 2M L2 (per core) http://kernel-perf.sourceforge.net/splice/4P-3.0Ghz-DCHT.png (4) everything on one graph: http://kernel-perf.sourceforge.net/splice/splice.png - Ken -- 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/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org