Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 Jan 2002 15:38:57 -0600 | From | Ken Brownfield <> | Subject | Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable |
| |
I don't think I made the claim that this was a benchmark -- I certainly realize that "make -j bzImage" is not real-world, but it is clearly indicative of heavy VM/CPU/context load. Since I don't believe this patch is currently in the running for inclusion, I'm just giving general feedback to the patch author rather than making a case.
For instance, "make -j bzImage" reproduced the ext3 bug that Andrew found where my other VM-intensive apps did not. I doubt we should keep the bug in the kernel because the situation isn't real-world enough.
But yes, a bug is worse than a behavior flaw, granted. -- Ken. brownfld@irridia.com
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 04:13:00PM -0500, Mark Hahn wrote: | > overall performance seems far lower. For instance, without the patch | > the -j build finishes in ~10 minutes (2x933P3/256MB) but with the patch | | please, PLEASE stop using "make -j" | for anything except the fork-bomb that it is. | pretending that it's a benchmark, especially one | to guide kernel tuning, is a travesty! | | if you want to simulate VM load, so something sane like | boot with mem=32M, or a simple "mmap(lots); mlockall" tool. | | regards, mark hahn. | | - | 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/
| |