lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Nov]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [BENCHMARK] 2.5.47{-mm1} with contest
    Quoting mark walters <kanelephant@yahoo.co.uk>:

    > --- Con Kolivas <conman@kolivas.net> wrote:
    > >
    > > I agree. Fortunately I don't think it's as bad a
    > > tradeoff as these numbers make
    > > out. The load accounting in contest (johntest?) is
    > > still relatively bogus. Apart
    > > from saying it's more or less loads I dont think the
    > > scale of the numbers are
    > > accurate.
    >
    >
    > Is the number of loads the total number of loads done
    > during the kernel compile or the number of loads per
    > unit time during the kernel compile? I was guessing
    > the former. (Andrew appeared to be guessing the
    > latter?)

    Number of loads = (total loads) * (kernel compile time) / (load run time)

    And the load run time is impossible to fix because of the variable time it takes
    to kill the load.

    The load will be doing more work while the kernel is not compiling. Thus it will
    always overestimate. At some stage I need to completely rewrite everything with
    the ability of the load itself to know when to start and stop counting load
    iterations; and I'm not even sure I can do that.

    Con
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:30    [W:0.020 / U:124.344 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site