Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 08 Nov 2002 20:15:07 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.4.{18,19{-ck9},20rc1{-aa1}} with contest |
| |
Con Kolivas wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > >Con Kolivas wrote: > >> io_load: > >> Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio > >> 2.4.18 [3] 474.1 15 36 10 6.64 > >> 2.4.19 [3] 492.6 14 38 10 6.90 > >> 2.4.19-ck9 [2] 140.6 49 5 5 1.97 > >> 2.4.20-rc1 [2] 1142.2 6 90 10 16.00 > >> 2.4.20-rc1aa1 [1] 1132.5 6 90 10 15.86 > > > >2.4.20-pre3 included some elevator changes. I assume they are the > >cause of this. Those changes have propagated into Alan's and Andrea's > >kernels. Hence they have significantly impacted the responsiveness > >of all mainstream 2.4 kernels under heavy writes. > > > >(The -ck patch includes rmap14b which includes the read-latency2 thing) > > Thanks for the explanation. I should have said this was ck with compressed > caching; not rmap. >
hrm. In that case I'll shut up with the speculating.
You're showing a big shift in behaviour between 2.4.19 and 2.4.20-rc1. Maybe it doesn't translate to worsened interactivity. Needs more testing and anaysis. - 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/
| |