From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 02:09:32 -0800 From: Andrew Morton Subject: qsbench -p 4 -m 96 numbers Message-Id: <20040225020932.14ca489a.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nick Piggin Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: qsbench is a pretty stupid thing - doesn't seem to have reference patternswhich are similar to anything apart from qsbench. But whatever - getting good numbers herre doesn't hurt anyone. On the 256MB 2-way: time ./qsbench -p 4 -m 96, 256MB, SMP: 2.4.25 5:41.67 1:48.89 1:45.38 1:32.43 1:37.42 1:47.30 blk_congestion_wait-return-remaining 1:20.81 0:49.29 1:18.58 1:13.27 1:02.09 2:24.03 kswapd-throttling-fixes 2:54.43 1:24.68 1:51.04 1:25.22 1:40.19 1:28.94 vm-dont-rotate-active-list 2:48.75 1:27.53 1:26.01 1:27.45 1:31.19 1:38.54 vm-lru-info 2:00.34 1:36.97 1:17.76 1:24.51 1:28.87 1:24.44 vm-shrink-zone 1:22.98 1:19.26 1:16.56 1:21.34 1:28.13 1:31.37 vm-tune-throttle 3:05.30 1:18.04 0:38.51 1:11.96 1:26.31 1:16.74 shrink_slab-for-all-zones 2:17.82 3:11.73 0:52.00 2:12.91 1:07.56 4:12.44 zone-balancing-fix 4:32.52 1:01.63 0:38.13 0:51.90 1:25.36 1:33.31 zone-balancing-batching 2:43.35 1:27.16 0:35.27 1:48.07 1:45.85 0:41.59 We seem to be beating 2.4 on this nowadays. It was not always that way - we used to have real problems with multiprocess workloads. It's a shame that vm-tune-throttle is such a jumble of different things. But these numbers show so much variance it's hard to know what's happening. Apart from "not much". -- 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