lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Jan]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Subtle MM bug
From
Date
Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br> writes:

> Now if 2.4 has worse _performance_ than 2.2 due to one
> reason or another, that I'd like to hear about ;)
>

Oh, well, it seems that I was wrong. :)


First test: hogmem 180 5 = allocate 180MB and dirty it 5 times (on a
192MB machine)

kernel | swap usage | speed
-------------------------------
2.2.17 | 48 MB | 11.8 MB/s
-------------------------------
2.4.0 | 206 MB | 11.1 MB/s
-------------------------------

So 2.2 is only marginally faster. Also it can be seen that 2.4 uses 4
times more swap space. If Linus says it's ok... :)


Second test: kernel compile make -j32 (empirically this puts the VM
under load, but not excessively!)

2.2.17 -> make -j32 392.49s user 47.87s system 168% cpu 4:21.13 total
2.4.0 -> make -j32 389.59s user 31.29s system 182% cpu 3:50.24 total

Now, is this great news or what, 2.4.0 is definitely faster.

--
Zlatko
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:52    [W:0.059 / U:10.568 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site