From: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: hugh@veritas.com, andrea@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Benchmarking objrmap under memory pressure
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 17:38:02 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <120240000.1081903082@flay> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040413005111.71c7716d.akpm@osdl.org>
>> UP Athlon 2100+ with 512Mb of RAM. Rebooted clean before each test
>> then did "make clean; make vmlinux; make clean". Then I timed a
>> "make -j 256 vmlinux" to get some testing under mem pressure.
>>
>> I was trying to test the overhead of objrmap under memory pressure,
>> but it seems it's actually distinctly negative overhead - rather pleasing
>> really ;-)
>>
>> 2.6.5
>> 225.18user 30.05system 6:33.72elapsed 64%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
>> 0inputs+0outputs (37590major+2604444minor)pagefaults 0swaps
>>
>> 2.6.5-anon_mm
>> 224.53user 26.00system 5:29.08elapsed 76%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
>> 0inputs+0outputs (29127major+2577211minor)pagefaults 0swaps
>
> A four second reduction in system time caused a one minute reduction in
> runtime? Pull the other one ;)
>
> Average of five runs, please...
You're right - it's rather variable. Still doesn't look bad though.
2.6.5
Average elapsed = 6:11
224.92user 30.15system 5:44.19elapsed 74%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
225.04user 30.23system 6:02.49elapsed 70%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
225.28user 29.60system 5:48.22elapsed 73%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
225.81user 31.75system 6:42.38elapsed 64%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
225.23user 30.20system 6:40.48elapsed 63%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
2.6.5-anon_mm
Average elapsed = 5:43
224.34user 25.43system 4:51.23elapsed 85%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
224.23user 25.93system 5:00.79elapsed 83%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
224.39user 26.36system 5:37.71elapsed 74%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
225.65user 27.13system 6:28.00elapsed 65%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
225.14user 27.26system 6:39.61elapsed 63%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
I've kicked off the -aa tree tests - will post them later tonight.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-04-14 0:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-04-13 7:39 Benchmarking objrmap under memory pressure Martin J. Bligh
2004-04-13 7:51 ` Andrew Morton
2004-04-13 7:55 ` Martin J. Bligh
2004-04-13 21:59 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-14 0:38 ` Martin J. Bligh [this message]
2004-04-14 16:27 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-14 16:42 ` Martin J. Bligh
2004-04-14 17:11 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-14 17:48 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-04-14 23:39 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-15 10:21 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-04-15 13:22 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-15 13:45 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-04-15 14:08 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-15 16:23 ` Bill Davidsen
2004-04-15 16:48 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-04-22 19:54 ` Bill Davidsen
2004-04-22 21:26 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-04-14 18:11 ` 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=120240000.1081903082@flay \
--to=mbligh@aracnet.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=andrea@suse.de \
--cc=hugh@veritas.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