From: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
To: linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: [BENCHMARK] reaim 2x,4x,8x with various SMP balancing patches
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 19:44:10 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200309141944.45097.kernel@kolivas.org> (raw)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
With the help of the OSDL hardware I've thrown a bootload of reaim benchmarks
at these various patches because of the confusion regarding their usefulness.
2.6.0-test5 is the baseline, and the 3 unique patches CMT,A3,BT were added by
themselves and all together to 2.6.0-test5 for comparison. Finally the full
2.6.0-test5-mm1 patch was compared. The A3 patch was modified slightly to
overcome the one minor magnitude error for fairness. Looking at the url for
each benchmark and examining the "Graph - Jobs per minute" is useful to
assess where the performance hovers.
Legend
260t5 - vanilla 2.6.0-test5
CMT - sched-CAN_MIGRATE_TASK-fix.patch
A3 - sched-2.6.0-test2-mm2-A3.patch
BT - sched-balance-tuning.patch
all - CMT + A3 + BT
mm1 - 2.6.0-test5-mm1
2 CPU:
Kernel Throughput URL
260t5 1337.11 http://khack.osdl.org/stp/279474/
CMT 1321.92 http://khack.osdl.org/stp/279796/
A3 1304.82 http://khack.osdl.org/stp/279799
BT 1326.27 http://khack.osdl.org/stp/279802
All 1337.79 http://khack.osdl.org/stp/279805/
mm1 1316.95 http://khack.osdl.org/stp/279588/
4 CPU:
Kernel Throughput URL
260t5 5406.68 http://khack.osdl.org/stp/279883
CMT
A3 5099.14 http://khack.osdl.org/stp/279800
BT 5721.79 http://khack.osdl.org/stp/279803
All 4919.36 http://khack.osdl.org/stp/279806
mm1 5360.32 http://khack.osdl.org/stp/279887
8 CPU:
Kernel Throughput URL
260t5 8812.21 http://khack.osdl.org/stp/279448/
CMT 8794.14 http://khack.osdl.org/stp/279798
A3 7084.15 http://khack.osdl.org/stp/279801
BT 8615.13 http://khack.osdl.org/stp/279804
All 7629.14 http://khack.osdl.org/stp/279919
mm1 8478.10 http://khack.osdl.org/stp/279562/
4xCMT seemed to not successfully finish.
In summary, it appears that all the patches cause detriment to performance,
except the combination of BT with 4 cpus. The A3 patch is particularly
detrimental, but it is reassuring to see that the extra patches in mm1 (which
includes O1int patches) recover a lot of that performance, even with the
other balancing patches.
Con
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/ZDhtZUg7+tp6mRURAmJAAJ4zMYHg7iSuVHi7SpiS5hkmoaQl9wCggrcB
SSH6dbJthgABVnEIn4K/z3M=
=Jz7G
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
reply other threads:[~2003-09-14 9:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=200309141944.45097.kernel@kolivas.org \
--to=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--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