Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 03 Mar 2003 09:40:01 -0800 | From | "Martin J. Bligh" <> | Subject | Re: percpu-2.5.63-bk5-1 (properly generated) |
| |
> On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 04:07:01PM -0800, Martin J. Bligh wrote: >> Failing that, if you can split it into 3 or 4 patches along the lines I >> suggested earlier, I'll try benching each bit seperately for you. > > Last ditch effort. No per_node stuff at all, and no new per_cpu users.
OK, that seems to get rid of the SDET degradation, but I rigged up the same test you were doing (make -j) and see only marginal improvement from the full patch (pernode2) ... not the 6s you were seeing.
Kernbench: (make -j N vmlinux, where N = 2 x num_cpus) Elapsed System User CPU 2.5.63-mjb2 44.09 94.38 557.26 1477.00 2.5.63-mjb2-pernode2 44.54 96.38 557.30 1466.75 2.5.63-mjb2-pernode3 44.01 95.22 556.69 1481.25
Kernbench: (make -j N vmlinux, where N = 16 x num_cpus) Elapsed System User CPU 2.5.63-mjb2 45.53 118.06 560.48 1489.50 2.5.63-mjb2-pernode2 45.25 116.68 561.28 1497.50 2.5.63-mjb2-pernode3 45.30 116.91 559.82 1492.00
Kernbench: (make -j vmlinux, maximal tasks) Elapsed System User CPU 2.5.63-mjb2 45.17 117.80 560.62 1500.50 2.5.63-mjb2-pernode2 44.91 115.95 560.98 1505.25 2.5.63-mjb2-pernode3 45.47 118.07 560.25 1491.75
-pernode2 was your full patch with the fix you sent, -pernode3 was the smaller patch you sent last. Can you try to reproduce the improvment were seeing, and grab a before and after profile? I don't seem to be able to replicate it.
M.
- 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/
|  |