From: Peter Rasmussen (udgaard) <plr@udgaard.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: plr@udgaard.com
Subject: Re: How can I help with VIA MVP3 problems?
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 00:29:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200105122229.AAA03353@udgaard.com> (raw)
I'm not on the list so please also reply directly to me. I may soon be done :-)
I was made aware of the following:
>On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 07:37:23PM +0200, Peter Rasmussen wrote:
>> 2.4.4-ac8 doing "time make dep clean bzImage modules modules_install" :
>>
>> udgaard:/usr/src/linux# cat /proc/meminfo
>> total: used: free: shared: buffers: cached:
>> Mem: 328101888 317947904 10153984 0 67219456 130404352
>> Swap: 542859264 0 542859264
>>
>> ======================== 2.2.16 ===========================
>>
>> udgaard:~$ cat /proc/meminfo
>> total: used: free: shared: buffers: cached:
>> Mem: 65789952 60755968 5033984 28221440 7872512 24219648
>> Swap: 542859264 1368064 541491200
>
>2.2.16 only recognizes 64 Mb? That makes all of the numbers less
>interesting, I guess.
>
I hadn't noticed that before and it helped me improving the test. By ensuring
that the two kernels looked at the same size RAM I found that the performance
numbers were the same.
However, I then now wonder why my system gets slower when increasing the amount of main RAM?
Is it a RAM caching problem in the chipset or the board similar to the braindead
Intel VX430 chipset that couldn't handle more than 64MB? I hope not, but I can't
see any other reason, even though I thought such problems were of the past?
Please let me know if you know something about it.
I found the following relations with regard to memory settings. As the 2.2 and
2.4 kernels I use performed the same with little RAM (64MB), I stayed with the
2.4.4-ac8 for simplicity's sake.
A 2.4.4-ac8 kernel build:
2.4.4-ac8 with 64MB RAM mem-setting: real 8m26.180s
user 7m5.340s
sys 0m39.430s
2.4.4-ac8 with 128MB RAM mem-setting: real 8m20.902s
user 7m8.810s
sys 0m39.800s
2.4.4-ac8 with 160MB RAM mem-setting: real 8m21.653s
user 7m13.830s
sys 0m37.840s
2.4.4-ac8 with 192MB RAM mem-setting: real 9m48.632s
user 8m39.270s
sys 0m39.740s
So it seems around here the performance starts to decrease.
I am still puzzled why the shared memory like the following is always zero on
the 2.4 kernels? All I can remember checking it on has it like that, but I can't
find any explanations about it?
udgaard:/usr/src/linux# cat /proc/meminfo
total: used: free: shared: buffers: cached:
Mem: 64135168 63148032 987136 0 2965504 34447360
Swap: 542859264 147456 542711808
Thank you very much,
Peter
next reply other threads:[~2001-05-12 22:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-05-12 22:29 Peter Rasmussen [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-05-12 17:37 How can I help with VIA MVP3 problems? Peter Rasmussen
2001-05-12 22:58 ` Alan Cox
2001-05-11 22:41 Peter Rasmussen
2001-05-11 23:19 ` Alan Cox
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=200105122229.AAA03353@udgaard.com \
--to=plr@udgaard.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