From: Con Kolivas <conman@kolivas.net>
To: linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
Subject: [BENCHMARK] 2.5.40-mm2 with contest
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 13:21:42 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1033960902.3da0fdc6839aa@kolivas.net> (raw)
Here are the latest results including 2.5.40-mm2 with contest v0.50
(http://contest.kolivas.net)
noload:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.19 [3] 67.7 98 0 0 1.01
2.5.38 [3] 72.0 93 0 0 1.07
2.5.39 [2] 72.2 93 0 0 1.07
2.5.40 [1] 72.5 93 0 0 1.08
2.5.40-mm1 [1] 72.9 93 0 0 1.09
2.5.40-mm2 [1] 72.2 93 0 0 1.07
process_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.19 [3] 106.5 59 112 43 1.59
2.5.38 [3] 89.5 74 34 28 1.33
2.5.39 [2] 91.2 73 36 28 1.36
2.5.40 [2] 82.8 80 25 23 1.23
2.5.40-mm1 [2] 86.9 77 30 25 1.29
2.5.40-mm2 [1] 98.0 69 45 33 1.46
io_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.19 [3] 492.6 14 38 10 7.33
2.5.38 [1] 4000.0 1 500 1 59.55
2.5.39 [2] 423.9 18 30 11 6.31
2.5.40 [1] 315.7 25 22 10 4.70
2.5.40-mm1 [1] 326.2 24 23 11 4.86
2.5.40-mm2 [2] 208.0 38 12 10 3.10
mem_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.19 [3] 100.0 72 33 3 1.49
2.5.38 [3] 107.3 70 34 3 1.60
2.5.39 [2] 103.1 72 31 3 1.53
2.5.40 [2] 102.5 72 31 3 1.53
2.5.40-mm1 [2] 107.7 68 29 2 1.60
2.5.40-mm2 [2] 165.1 44 38 2 2.46
Well something happened here. The tuning under IO load has relaxed the
pressure even more to allow kernel compilation to proceed. Mem load seems to
have changed dramatically though with a disproportionately long increase in
kernel compilation time given only a modest increase in the amount of work
done by mem load. Process_load seems proportionately longer than mm1 with an
appropriate rise in load work done.
Below are also the experimental results with the newer loads:
tarc_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.19 [2] 106.5 70 1 8 1.59
2.5.38 [1] 97.2 79 1 6 1.45
2.5.39 [1] 91.8 83 1 6 1.37
2.5.40 [1] 96.9 80 1 6 1.44
2.5.40-mm1 [1] 94.4 81 1 6 1.41
2.5.40-mm2 [1] 91.9 82 1 6 1.37
tarx_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.19 [1] 132.4 55 2 9 1.97
2.5.38 [1] 120.5 63 2 8 1.79
2.5.39 [1] 108.3 69 1 6 1.61
2.5.40 [1] 110.7 68 1 6 1.65
2.5.40-mm1 [1] 191.5 39 3 7 2.85
2.5.40-mm2 [1] 188.1 39 3 7 2.80
read_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.19 [2] 134.1 54 14 5 2.00
2.5.38 [2] 100.5 76 9 5 1.50
2.5.39 [2] 101.3 74 14 6 1.51
2.5.40 [1] 101.5 73 13 5 1.51
2.5.40-mm1 [1] 104.5 74 9 5 1.56
2.5.40-mm2 [1] 102.7 75 7 4 1.53
lslr_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.19 [1] 89.8 77 1 20 1.34
2.5.38 [1] 99.1 71 1 20 1.48
2.5.39 [1] 101.3 70 2 24 1.51
2.5.40 [1] 97.0 72 1 21 1.44
2.5.40-mm1 [1] 96.6 73 1 22 1.44
2.5.40-mm2 [1] 94.3 75 1 21 1.40
These do not appear significantly different.
Con
next reply other threads:[~2002-10-07 3:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-10-07 3:21 Con Kolivas [this message]
2002-10-07 7:38 ` [BENCHMARK] 2.5.40-mm2 with contest Andrew Morton
2002-10-08 1:01 ` Con Kolivas
2002-10-08 1:25 ` Andrew Morton
2002-10-08 1:41 ` Con Kolivas
2002-10-10 17:40 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-10-10 23:17 ` Con Kolivas
2002-10-10 17:32 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-10-10 18:11 ` Andrew Morton
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-10-07 12:11 Ed Tomlinson
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=1033960902.3da0fdc6839aa@kolivas.net \
--to=conman@kolivas.net \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox