Messages in this thread |  | | From | kumon@flab ... | Date | Mon, 30 Oct 2000 18:27:44 +0900 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was: Strange performance behavior of 2.4.0-test9) |
| |
Andrew Morton writes: > > I agree with me. Could you please test the scalability > of this?
Here is the result, measured on 8-way profusion.
Andrew posted two paches, so called P1 and P2.
Req/s test10-pre5: 2255 bad performance ---- test9+P2: 5243 test10-pre5+P1: 5187 test10-pre5+P2: 5258
P2 may be a little bit better.
---------- Data summary sorted by the performance: test8 5287 <-- best performance test10-pre5+P2: 5258 test9+P2: 5243 test9+mypatch: 5192 <-- a little bit worse test10-pre5+P1: 5187 test1 3702 <-- no good scalability test10-pre5: 2255 <-- negative scalability test9 2193
The value changes within 30-50 seems fluctuations.
-- Computer Systems Laboratory, Fujitsu Labs. kumon@flab.fujitsu.co.jp - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |