From: richard <yang.lu@archermind.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: kernel performance issue
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 18:38:06 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4891960E.2000605@archermind.com> (raw)
Hi:
I have a question about the kernel performance of kernel 2.6.24. I use
"time"
to account the time cost of "date" execution, and find that the "real time"
of kernel 2.6.24 is always bigger than kernel 2.6.21 on my arm board.
For my
understanding, the time cost of 2.6.24 shouldn't be bigger than 2.6.21,
because
it is a upgrade of 2.6.21 and the its performance should be better than
2.6.21,
if I am wrong please let me know.
[root@Linux /root]#cat ./date-loop.sh
#! /bin/sh
loop=1
while [ $loop -le 50 ]
do
date +%s
loop=$(($loop+1))
done
Time cost in kernel 2.6.24:
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.48s
user 0m 0.06s
sys 0m 0.43s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.48s
user 0m 0.07s
sys 0m 0.42s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.48s
user 0m 0.09s
sys 0m 0.40s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.48s
user 0m 0.07s
sys 0m 0.41s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.48s
user 0m 0.07s
sys 0m 0.42s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.48s
user 0m 0.09s
sys 0m 0.40s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.48s
user 0m 0.06s
sys 0m 0.43s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.48s
user 0m 0.08s
sys 0m 0.41s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.48s
user 0m 0.09s
sys 0m 0.40s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.48s
user 0m 0.10s
sys 0m 0.39s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.48s
user 0m 0.05s
sys 0m 0.44s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.48s
user 0m 0.05s
sys 0m 0.44s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.48s
user 0m 0.09s
sys 0m 0.40s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.48s
user 0m 0.07s
sys 0m 0.42s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.48s
user 0m 0.07s
sys 0m 0.42s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.48s
user 0m 0.09s
sys 0m 0.40s
[root@Linux /root]#
Time cost in kernel 2.6.21:
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.45s
user 0m 0.08s
sys 0m 0.38s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.45s
user 0m 0.07s
sys 0m 0.39s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.45s
user 0m 0.09s
sys 0m 0.37s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.45s
user 0m 0.09s
sys 0m 0.37s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.45s
user 0m 0.08s
sys 0m 0.38s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.45s
user 0m 0.06s
sys 0m 0.40s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.45s
user 0m 0.09s
sys 0m 0.37s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.45s
user 0m 0.10s
sys 0m 0.36s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.45s
user 0m 0.04s
sys 0m 0.42s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.45s
user 0m 0.09s
sys 0m 0.37s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.45s
user 0m 0.07s
sys 0m 0.39s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.45s
user 0m 0.08s
sys 0m 0.38s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.45s
user 0m 0.10s
sys 0m 0.36s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.45s
user 0m 0.09s
sys 0m 0.37s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.45s
user 0m 0.09s
sys 0m 0.37s
[root@Linux /root]#time ./date-loop.sh > /dev/null
real 0m 0.45s
user 0m 0.07s
sys 0m 0.39s
[root@Linux /root]#
--
Best Regards,
Yang Lu
reply other threads:[~2008-07-31 10:53 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=4891960E.2000605@archermind.com \
--to=yang.lu@archermind.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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