From: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
To: Con Kolivas <conman@kolivas.net>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>,
linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.4.20-rc2-aa1 with contest
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 23:06:13 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3DE1CBE5.C6576272@digeo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 200211251744.35509.conman@kolivas.net
Con Kolivas wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> >On Sat, Nov 23, 2002 at 09:29:22AM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >> process_load:
> >> Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
> >> 2.4.18 [3] 109.5 57 119 44 1.50
> >> 2.4.19 [3] 106.5 59 112 43 1.45
> >> 2.4.20-rc1 [3] 110.7 58 119 43 1.51
> >> 2.4.20-rc1aa1 [3] 110.5 58 117 43 1.51*
> >> 2420rc2aa1 [1] 212.5 31 412 69 2.90*
> >>
> >> This load just copies data between 4 processes repeatedly. Seems to take
> >> longer.
> >
> >you go into linux/include/blkdev.h and increase MAX_QUEUE_SECTORS to (2
> ><< (20 - 9)) and see if it makes any differences here? if it doesn't
> >make differences it could be the a bit increased readhaead but I doubt
> >it's the latter.
>
> No significant difference:
> 2420rc2aa1 212.53 31% 412 69%
> 2420rc2aa1mqs2 227.72 29% 455 71%
process_load is a CPU scheduler thing, not a disk scheduler thing. Something
must have changed in kernel/sched.c.
It's debatable whether 210 seconds is worse than 110 seconds in
this test, really. You have four processes madly piping stuff around and
four to eight processes compiling stuff. I don't see why it's "worse"
that the compile happens to get 31% of the CPU time in this kernel. One
would need to decide how much CPU it _should_ get before making that decision.
> ...
>
> The machine stops responding but sysrq works. It wont write anything to the
> logs. To get the error I have to run the mem_load portion of contest, not
> just mem_load by itself. The purpose of mem_load is to be just that - a
> memory load during the contest benchmark and contest will kill it when it
> finishes testing in that load. To reproduce it yourself, run mem_load then do
> a kernel compile make -j(4xnum_cpus). If that doesnt do it I'm not sure how
> else you can see it. sys-rq-T shows too much stuff on screen for me to make
> any sense of it and scrolls away without me being able to scroll up.
Try sysrq-p.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-11-25 6:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-11-22 22:29 [BENCHMARK] 2.4.20-rc2-aa1 with contest Con Kolivas
2002-11-24 16:28 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2002-11-25 6:44 ` Con Kolivas
2002-11-25 7:06 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2002-11-25 18:57 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2002-11-25 18:23 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2002-11-30 16:17 ` Andrea Arcangeli
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=3DE1CBE5.C6576272@digeo.com \
--to=akpm@digeo.com \
--cc=andrea@suse.de \
--cc=conman@kolivas.net \
--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