Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Fri, 19 Oct 2001 13:30:05 +0200 (CEST) | From | Luigi Genoni <> | Subject | Re: VM tests on 2.4.13-pre5aa1 |
| |
Interesting! on the week end I will set up a stress test for the VM to see if I am able to get some failure. Just I need a little of time, since I am at SMAU for the magazine I write for (by the way, inside of the press room there is a very very pretty bar girl :) ). mmm, I should immagine some good test case...
Luigi
On Fri, 19 Oct 2001 rwhron@earthlink.net wrote:
> > Kernel: 2.4.13-pre5aa1 > > I discovered something important for the test results I've > been reporting. The mp3's that I've been listening to were > not all sampled at the same rate. That means some of the > comparisons are suspect. > > The mp3's were sampled between 88k and 192k. I did not notice > the sample rate affecting whether an mp3 skips or not. > I.E. an 88k mp3 and a 192k mp3 skip about the same on a > kernel/test that sputters. There probably is a difference, > but it isn't obvious. So the subjective reports on sound quality > are reasonable. In the future, I'll make sure comparisons that > include timing are done with comparable mp3's. > > > Timing variance: > > mmap01 Low time: 4:13 High 4:29 > mtest01 Low time: :43 High 1:10 > > I'm not saying the difference between the high and low times > is the variance between an 88k and 192k mp3. For mtest01 it > could be, because that test is short enough to run a couple > times during one song. mmap01 may have had part at 88k and part > at 192k. > > Okay, with the disclaimers out of the way. Here are the results: > > > mmap001 > > Average for 5 mmap001 runs > bytes allocated: 2048000000 > User time (seconds): 19.172 > System time (seconds): 15.182 > Elapsed (wall clock seconds) time: 258.82 > Percent of CPU this job got: 12.80 > Major (requiring I/O) page faults: 500169.0 > Minor (reclaiming a frame) faults: 32.0 > > mtest01 > > Averages for 10 mtest01 runs > bytes allocated: 1251370598 > User time (seconds): 2.079 > System time (seconds): 2.849 > Elapsed (wall clock) time: 54.075 > Percent of CPU this job got: 8.70 > Major (requiring I/O) page faults: 107.2 > Minor (reclaiming a frame) faults: 306293.2 > > > Even though I made the disclaimers, I will note that 2.4.13-pre3aa1 > was doing the mmap001 test consistently (4 runs) at around 210 > seconds average. 2.4.13-pre5 and 2.4.13-pre5aa1 are both > around 260 seconds. > > > Sound quality: > > Mostly good for mtest01. page-cluster is 3. > > Not as good, for mmap01. I'll give a subjective 4 on a scale of 10. > > Ideally I'd have a nice long mp3, and could say the test took 18:27 and mp3 > played 15:10 (or whatever). > > > One other note for people who do similar tests. mp3blaster skips less > when compiled with glibc-linuxthreads-2.2.4 (default configure) than with > pth-1.40. glibc-linuxthreads uses more memory and creates more processes > though. All of my tests were with a glibc threads mp3blaster. > > I'm looking forward to playing with Andrea's new knobs in /proc/sys/vm. > > Have fun! > -- > Randy Hron > > - > 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/
|  |