Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.4.{18,19{-ck9},20rc1{-aa1}} with contest

[Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>]

Con Kolivas wrote:
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> >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
> >> 2.4.19-ck9 [2]          140.6   49      5       5       1.97
> >> 2.4.20-rc1 [2]          1142.2  6       90      10      16.00
> >> 2.4.20-rc1aa1 [1]       1132.5  6       90      10      15.86
> >
> >2.4.20-pre3 included some elevator changes.  I assume they are the
> >cause of this.  Those changes have propagated into Alan's and Andrea's
> >kernels.   Hence they have significantly impacted the responsiveness
> >of all mainstream 2.4 kernels under heavy writes.
> >
> >(The -ck patch includes rmap14b which includes the read-latency2 thing)
> 
> Thanks for the explanation. I should have said this was ck with compressed
> caching; not rmap.
> 

hrm.  In that case I'll shut up with the speculating.

You're showing a big shift in behaviour between 2.4.19 and 2.4.20-rc1.
Maybe it doesn't translate to worsened interactivity.  Needs more
testing and anaysis.