lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Feb]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Weight-balanced binary tree + KVM growable memory slots using wbtree
    On 02/23/2011 09:28 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
    > I had forgotten about<1M mem, so actually the slot configuration was:
    >
    > 0:<1M
    > 1: 1M - 3.5G
    > 2: 4G+
    >
    > I stacked the deck in favor of the static array (0: 4G+, 1: 1M-3.5G, 2:
    > <1M), and got these kernbench results:
    >
    > base (stdev) reorder (stdev) wbtree (stdev)
    > --------+-----------------+----------------+----------------+
    > Elapsed | 42.809 (0.19) | 42.160 (0.22) | 42.305 (0.23) |
    > User | 115.709 (0.22) | 114.358 (0.40) | 114.720 (0.31) |
    > System | 41.605 (0.14) | 40.741 (0.22) | 40.924 (0.20) |
    > %cpu | 366.9 (1.45) | 367.4 (1.17) | 367.6 (1.51) |
    > context | 7272.3 (68.6) | 7248.1 (89.7) | 7249.5 (97.8) |
    > sleeps | 14826.2 (110.6) | 14780.7 (86.9) | 14798.5 (63.0) |
    >
    > So, wbtree is only slightly behind reordering, and the standard
    > deviation suggests the runs are mostly within the noise of each other.
    > Thanks,

    Doesn't this indicate we should use reordering, instead of a new data
    structure?

    --
    error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2011-02-24 11:09    [W:0.035 / U:89.768 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site