From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (d01relay02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.234]) by e2.ny.us.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j33J6IM8027124 for ; Sun, 3 Apr 2005 15:06:18 -0400 Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (d01av01.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.215]) by d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VER6.6) with ESMTP id j33J6FU3081916 for ; Sun, 3 Apr 2005 15:06:18 -0400 Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av01.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j33J6ExS032098 for ; Sun, 3 Apr 2005 15:06:14 -0400 Subject: Re: AIM9 slowdowns between 2.6.11 and 2.6.12-rc1 From: Dave Hansen In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 12:06:10 -0700 Message-Id: <1112555170.7189.34.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Mel Gorman Cc: Linux Memory Management List , Linux Kernel Mailing List List-ID: On Sun, 2005-04-03 at 15:37 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > While testing the page placement policy patches on 2.6.12-rc1, I noticed > that aim9 is showing significant slowdowns on page allocation-related > tests. An excerpt of the results is at the end of this mail but it shows > that page_test is allocating 18000 less pages. > > I did not check who has been recently changing the buddy allocator but > they might want to run a benchmark or two to make sure this is not > something specific to my setup. Can you get some kernel profiles to see what, exactly, is causing the decreased performance? Also, what kind of system do you have? Does backing this out help? If not, can you test some BK snapshots to see when this started occurring? http://linus.bkbits.net:8080/linux-2.5/cset@422de02c1628MP_noKSum9sGlTaC-Q -- Dave -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: aart@kvack.org