Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [BENCHMARK] fork_load module tested for contest | Date | Wed, 25 Sep 2002 15:14:26 -0700 | From | Cliff White <> |
| |
> > > I've been trialling a new load module for the contest benchmark > (http://contest.kolivas.net) which simply forks a process that does nothing, > waits for it to die, then repeats. Here are the results I have obtained so far: > > noload: > Kernel Time CPU Ratio > 2.4.19 72.90 99% 1.00 > 2.4.19-ck7 71.55 100% 0.98 > 2.5.38 73.86 99% 1.01 > 2.5.38-mm2 73.93 99% 1.01 > > fork_load: > Kernel Time CPU Ratio > 2.4.19 100.05 69% 1.37 > 2.4.19-ck7 74.65 95% 1.02 > 2.5.38 77.35 95% 1.06 > 2.5.38-mm2 76.99 95% 1.06 > > ck7 uses O1, preempt, low latency > Preempt=N for all other kernels > > Clearly you can see the 2.5 kernels have a substantial lead over the current > stable kernel. > > This load module is not part of the contest package yet. I could certainly > change it to fork n processes but I'm not really sure just how many n should be.
I think for OSDL/STP, it would be nice if n == number of CPU's, so maybe make 'n' an arg? When you say the process 'does nothing', what do you mean? It forks, then the child does exit() ? cliffw > > Comments? > > Con Kolivas > > P.S. Results have negligible differences on repeat testing. > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ >
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |