From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262329AbVGWDiY (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:38:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262327AbVGWDiY (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:38:24 -0400 Received: from linuxwireless.org.ve.carpathiahost.net ([66.117.45.234]:26045 "EHLO linuxwireless.org.ve.carpathiahost.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262325AbVGWDfx (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:35:53 -0400 Message-ID: <42E1ACCF.8000308@linuxwireless.org> Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 21:34:55 -0500 From: Alejandro Bonilla User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050513 Debian/1.7.8-1 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lee Revell CC: Blaisorblade , LKML , Andrian Bunk , "H. Peter Anvin" , torvalds@osdl.org Subject: Re: Giving developers clue how many testers verified certain kernel version References: <200507230244.11338.blaisorblade@yahoo.it> <42E1986B.8070202@linuxwireless.org> <1122088160.6510.7.camel@mindpipe> <42E1A832.7010604@linuxwireless.org> <1122088863.6510.19.camel@mindpipe> In-Reply-To: <1122088863.6510.19.camel@mindpipe> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Lee Revell wrote: >On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 21:15 -0500, Alejandro Bonilla wrote: > > >>OK, I will, but I first of all need to learn how to tell if benchmarks >>are better or worse. >> >> > >Con's interactivity benchmark looks quite promising for finding >scheduler related interactivity regressions. It certainly has confirmed >what we already knew re: SCHED_FIFO performance, if we extend that to >SCHED_OTHER which is a more interesting problem then there's serious >potential for improvement. AFAIK no one has posted any 2.4 vs 2.6 >interbench results yet... > > I will give it a try. >I suspect a lot of the boot time issue is due to userspace. But, it >should be trivial to benchmark this one, just use the TSC or whatever to >measure the time from first kernel entry to execing init(). > > You got it! As a laptop user, I think it just takes too much more. I think it is maybe hotplugs fault with the kernel? I don't know how much is done by the kernel or userspace but it definitely takes longer. I could do some sort of benchmarks, but believe me, I hate to say this, but I use 2.6 because of much more power managements features in it. Else I like 2.4 a lot more. Is like, the feels is sharper. Sometimes when I got into a tty1, it takes some time after I put my username in to prompt me for a password. This does not occur when I boot with 2.4.27. Strange huh? I don't want to be an ass and say that 2.4 is better, instead I want to help and let determine why is it that I feel 2.6 slower. .Alejandro >Lee > > > >