* [BENCHMARK] 2.5.48-mm1 with contest
@ 2002-11-19 21:28 Con Kolivas
2002-11-19 21:39 ` Robert Love
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Con Kolivas @ 2002-11-19 21:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux kernel mailing list; +Cc: Andrew Morton
Here are contest benchmarks up to 2.5.48-mm1
noload:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.18 [5] 71.7 93 0 0 0.98
2.5.47 [3] 73.5 93 0 0 1.00
2.5.47-mm1 [5] 73.6 93 0 0 1.01
2.5.47-mm3 [2] 73.7 93 0 0 1.01
2.5.48 [5] 73.9 93 0 0 1.01
2.5.48-mm1 [5] 73.8 93 0 0 1.01
cacherun:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.18 [2] 66.6 99 0 0 0.91
2.5.47 [3] 68.3 99 0 0 0.93
2.5.47-mm1 [5] 68.4 99 0 0 0.93
2.5.47-mm3 [2] 68.3 99 0 0 0.93
2.5.48 [5] 68.5 99 0 0 0.94
2.5.48-mm1 [5] 68.3 99 0 0 0.93
process_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.18 [3] 109.5 57 119 44 1.50
2.5.47 [3] 83.4 82 22 21 1.14
2.5.47-mm1 [5] 83.0 83 21 20 1.13
2.5.47-mm3 [2] 84.2 82 22 21 1.15
2.5.48 [5] 86.5 79 26 23 1.18
2.5.48-mm1 [5] 90.5 76 30 26 1.24
dbench_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.18 [1] 346.6 20 1 57 4.73
2.5.47 [2] 224.2 33 1 44 3.06
2.5.47-mm3 [2] 201.6 38 1 39 2.75
2.5.48 [5] 236.4 31 1 43 3.23
2.5.48-mm1 [5] 234.2 32 1 39 3.20
ctar_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.18 [3] 117.4 63 1 7 1.60
2.5.47 [3] 93.9 80 1 5 1.28
2.5.47-mm1 [5] 94.0 81 1 5 1.28
2.5.47-mm3 [2] 94.0 81 1 6 1.28
2.5.48 [5] 93.5 81 1 5 1.28
2.5.48-mm1 [5] 95.4 79 1 5 1.30
xtar_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.18 [3] 150.8 49 2 8 2.06
2.5.47 [3] 167.1 45 2 7 2.28
2.5.47-mm1 [5] 118.5 64 1 7 1.62
2.5.47-mm3 [2] 211.3 38 2 6 2.89
2.5.48 [5] 184.4 41 2 6 2.52
2.5.48-mm1 [5] 210.7 35 2 6 2.88
io_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.18 [3] 474.1 15 36 10 6.48
2.5.47 [3] 165.9 46 9 9 2.27
2.5.47-mm1 [5] 126.3 61 5 8 1.73
2.5.47-mm3 [2] 117.1 65 4 8 1.60
2.5.48 [5] 131.4 59 6 8 1.79
2.5.48-mm1 [5] 119.9 62 4 7 1.64
read_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.18 [3] 102.3 70 6 3 1.40
2.5.47 [3] 103.4 74 6 4 1.41
2.5.47-mm1 [5] 100.6 76 7 4 1.37
2.5.47-mm3 [2] 218.5 34 10 2 2.98*
2.5.48 [5] 102.9 74 6 4 1.41
2.5.48-mm1 [5] 256.7 29 11 2 3.51*
list_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.18 [3] 90.2 76 1 17 1.23
2.5.47 [3] 100.2 71 1 20 1.37
2.5.47-mm1 [5] 102.4 69 1 19 1.40
2.5.47-mm3 [2] 101.2 71 1 21 1.38
2.5.48 [5] 98.2 72 1 19 1.34
2.5.48-mm1 [5] 99.3 72 1 21 1.36
mem_load:
Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
2.4.18 [3] 103.3 70 32 3 1.41
2.5.47 [3] 151.1 49 35 2 2.06
2.5.47-mm1 [5] 127.0 58 29 2 1.73
2.5.47-mm3 [2] 243.8 31 39 1 3.33*
2.5.48 [5] 121.2 61 30 2 1.66
2.5.48-mm1 [5] 290.7 26 42 1 3.97*
Con
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.5.48-mm1 with contest
2002-11-19 21:28 [BENCHMARK] 2.5.48-mm1 with contest Con Kolivas
@ 2002-11-19 21:39 ` Robert Love
2002-11-19 21:53 ` Andrew Morton
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Robert Love @ 2002-11-19 21:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Con Kolivas; +Cc: linux kernel mailing list, Andrew Morton
On Tue, 2002-11-19 at 16:28, Con Kolivas wrote:
> xtar_load:
> Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
> 2.5.48 [5] 184.4 41 2 6 2.52
> 2.5.48-mm1 [5] 210.7 35 2 6 2.88
>
> read_load:
> Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
> 2.5.48 [5] 102.9 74 6 4 1.41
> 2.5.48-mm1 [5] 256.7 29 11 2 3.51*
What changed, Andrew?
Wall time is up but CPU is down... spending more time on I/O?
Con, mind refreshing me on what the LCPU% and Ratio columns mean?
Thanks,
Robert Love
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.5.48-mm1 with contest
2002-11-19 21:39 ` Robert Love
@ 2002-11-19 21:53 ` Andrew Morton
2002-11-19 22:40 ` Con Kolivas
2002-11-20 7:30 ` Jens Axboe
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Morton @ 2002-11-19 21:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Love; +Cc: Con Kolivas, linux kernel mailing list
Robert Love wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2002-11-19 at 16:28, Con Kolivas wrote:
>
> > xtar_load:
> > Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
> > 2.5.48 [5] 184.4 41 2 6 2.52
> > 2.5.48-mm1 [5] 210.7 35 2 6 2.88
> >
> > read_load:
> > Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
> > 2.5.48 [5] 102.9 74 6 4 1.41
> > 2.5.48-mm1 [5] 256.7 29 11 2 3.51*
>
> What changed, Andrew?
>
> Wall time is up but CPU is down... spending more time on I/O?
Big changes in the IO scheduler. I have not really sat down
and looked at the effects of those changes - Jens keeps on
changing it, and I keep on diddling the queue sizes. So it
has only really been "stability tested" at this time.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.5.48-mm1 with contest
2002-11-19 21:39 ` Robert Love
2002-11-19 21:53 ` Andrew Morton
@ 2002-11-19 22:40 ` Con Kolivas
2002-11-20 7:30 ` Jens Axboe
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Con Kolivas @ 2002-11-19 22:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Love; +Cc: linux kernel mailing list, Andrew Morton
Quoting Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>:
> On Tue, 2002-11-19 at 16:28, Con Kolivas wrote:
>
> > xtar_load:
> > Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
> > 2.5.48 [5] 184.4 41 2 6 2.52
> > 2.5.48-mm1 [5] 210.7 35 2 6 2.88
> >
> > read_load:
> > Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
> > 2.5.48 [5] 102.9 74 6 4 1.41
> > 2.5.48-mm1 [5] 256.7 29 11 2 3.51*
>
> What changed, Andrew?
>
> Wall time is up but CPU is down... spending more time on I/O?
>
> Con, mind refreshing me on what the LCPU% and Ratio columns mean?
LCPU% is the cpu% as reported by 'time load' - It will overestimate slightly.
Ratio is the simply kernel compile time over reference (in this case 2.4.18 with
no load).
Con
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.5.48-mm1 with contest
2002-11-19 21:39 ` Robert Love
2002-11-19 21:53 ` Andrew Morton
2002-11-19 22:40 ` Con Kolivas
@ 2002-11-20 7:30 ` Jens Axboe
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2002-11-20 7:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Love; +Cc: Con Kolivas, linux kernel mailing list, Andrew Morton
On Tue, Nov 19 2002, Robert Love wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-11-19 at 16:28, Con Kolivas wrote:
>
> > xtar_load:
> > Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
> > 2.5.48 [5] 184.4 41 2 6 2.52
> > 2.5.48-mm1 [5] 210.7 35 2 6 2.88
> >
> > read_load:
> > Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
> > 2.5.48 [5] 102.9 74 6 4 1.41
> > 2.5.48-mm1 [5] 256.7 29 11 2 3.51*
>
> What changed, Andrew?
>
> Wall time is up but CPU is down... spending more time on I/O?
-mm is an io scheduler test base atm, expect fluctuations. Unless you
are working on it, dont worry about it.
--
Jens Axboe
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-11-20 7:23 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-11-19 21:28 [BENCHMARK] 2.5.48-mm1 with contest Con Kolivas
2002-11-19 21:39 ` Robert Love
2002-11-19 21:53 ` Andrew Morton
2002-11-19 22:40 ` Con Kolivas
2002-11-20 7:30 ` Jens Axboe
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox