Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: UP 2.2.18 makes kernels 3% faster than UP 2.4.0-test12 | From | "John Fremlin" <> | Date | 11 Dec 2000 18:16:43 +0000 |
| |
Steven Cole <scole@lanl.gov> writes:
[...]
> In each case, the task and the tools used are the same. The only > difference was the kernel used. In both cases, 2.2.18 won by 3%. > Its comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges. Granted 3% > isn't very much, but I would have guessed that 2.4.0 would have been > the winner. It wasn't, at least for this single processor machine.
Two points: (1) gcc 2.95 makes slightly slower code than egcs-1.1 (according to benchmarks on gcc.gnu.org) so compile 2.4 kernel with egcs for a fairer comparison. (2) The new VM was a performance regression for throughput.
I think that it is important that the extent of the indisputable performance decreases be quantified and traced. For me there was a subjective performance peak around 2.3.48 IIRC, though it might have been before. Andrea Archangeli has a VM patch that seems to help in some cases.
It would be interesting to run a series of (automated) tests on a lot of kernel versions, and to see how far performance is behind FreeBSD (or even NetBSD).
[...]
--
http://www.penguinpowered.com/~vii - 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/
|  |