lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Mar]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc
From
Date
On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 23:34 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Mar 2008, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
>
> > > So block 192 and 512's and very active and their fast free percentage
> > > is low.
> > On my 8-core stoakley, there is no such regression. Below data is after testing.
>
> Ok get the detailed statistics for this configuration as well. Then we
> can see what kind of slub behavior changes between both configurations.
I did paste such data in a prior email. COpy it below.

On my 8-core stoakley, there is no such regression. Below data is after testing.
[root@lkp-st02-x8664 ~]# slabinfo -AD
Name Objects Alloc Free %Fast
:0000192 3170 80055388 80052280 92 1
:0000512 316 80012750 80012466 69 1
vm_area_struct 2642 194700 192193 94 16
:0000064 3846 74468 70820 97 53
:0004096 15 69014 69012 98 97
:0000128 1447 32920 31541 91 8
dentry 13485 33060 19652 92 42
:0000080 10639 23377 12953 98 98
:0000096 1662 16496 15036 99 94
:0000832 232 14422 14203 85 10
:0000016 2733 15102 13372 99 14

I ran it for many times and got the similiar output from slabinfo.

>
> The 16p is really one node?
Yes. It's a SMP machine.

> No strange variances in memory latencies?
No.




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-03-14 08:29    [W:0.057 / U:23.508 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site