From: Con Kolivas <conman@kolivas.net>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
Cc: linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.5.47{-mm1} with contest
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 12:51:34 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1037065894.3dd05ea6f1d84@kolivas.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3DD046BD.799F36D4@digeo.com>
Quoting Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>:
> Con Kolivas wrote:
> >
> > io_load:
> > Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
> > 2.4.18 [3] 474.1 15 36 10 6.64
> > 2.4.19 [3] 492.6 14 38 10 6.90
> > 2.5.46 [1] 600.5 13 48 12 8.41
> > 2.5.46-mm1 [5] 134.3 58 6 8 1.88
> > 2.5.47 [3] 165.9 46 9 9 2.32
> > 2.5.47-mm1 [5] 126.3 61 5 8 1.77
> >
> > Very nice. Further improvement in 2.5.47-mm1 (note the big change in
> 2.5.46-47
> > is consistent with the preempt addition as mentioned in a previous thread)
> >
>
> Actually, 2.5.47 changed fifo_batch from 32 to 16. That's what caused
> this big shift.
There I go again, inappropriately commenting on the kernel ;-P Anyway preempt
does help here too (I never said that).
> We've increased the kernel build speed by 3.6x while decreasing the
> speed at which writes are retired by 5.3x.
>
> It could be argued that this is a net decrease in throughput. Although
> there's clearly a big increase in total CPU utilisation.
>
> It's a tradeoff. I think this is a better tradeoff than the old one
> though.
I agree. Fortunately I don't think it's as bad a tradeoff as these numbers make
out. The load accounting in contest (johntest?) is still relatively bogus. Apart
from saying it's more or less loads I dont think the scale of the numbers are
accurate.
Con
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-11-12 1:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-11-11 23:31 [BENCHMARK] 2.5.47{-mm1} with contest Con Kolivas
2002-11-12 0:09 ` Andrew Morton
2002-11-12 1:51 ` Con Kolivas [this message]
2002-11-12 2:07 ` mark walters
2002-11-12 2:18 ` Con Kolivas
2002-11-12 8:52 ` Giuliano Pochini
2002-11-12 9:20 ` Jens Axboe
2002-11-12 9:40 ` Con Kolivas
2002-11-12 3:04 ` Aaron Lehmann
2002-11-12 11:04 ` Andrew Morton
2002-11-12 14:20 ` Aaron Lehmann
2002-11-12 14:23 ` Jens Axboe
2002-11-12 20:37 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-11-12 20:59 ` Andrew Morton
2002-11-20 23:02 ` Andrew Morton
2002-11-21 0:08 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-11-21 1:11 ` Alan Cox
2002-11-21 6:54 ` Andrew Morton
2002-11-21 13:20 ` Dave Jones
2002-11-21 17:21 ` Andrew Morton
2002-11-21 17:26 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-11-21 18:18 ` Dave Jones
2002-11-21 18:25 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-11-21 14:00 ` Dave Jones
2002-11-21 19:59 ` Denis Vlasenko
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=1037065894.3dd05ea6f1d84@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