From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from stingray.netplus.net (root@stingray.netplus.net [206.250.192.19]) by kvack.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA24796 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 1999 22:34:53 -0500 Message-ID: <36942ACA.3F8C055D@netplus.net> Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 21:32:26 -0600 From: Steve Bergman MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Results: 2.2.0-pre5 vs arcavm10 vs arcavm9 vs arcavm7 References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Andrea Arcangeli Cc: brent verner , "Garst R. Reese" , Kalle Andersson , Zlatko Calusic , Ben McCann , bredelin@ucsd.edu, linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu, linux-mm@kvack.org, Linus Torvalds , Alan Cox , "Stephen C. Tweedie" List-ID: Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > I've put out a new arca-vm-10 with at least this bug fixed. > > ftp://e-mind.com/pub/linux/kernel-patches/2.2.0-pre4-arca-VM-10 > Here are my latest numbers. This is timing a complete kernel compile (make clean;make depend;make;make modules;make modules_install) in 16MB memory with netscape, kde, and various daemons running. I unknowningly had two more daemons running in the background this time than last so the numbers can't be compared directly with my last test (Which I think I only sent to Andrea). But all of these numbers are consistent with *each other*. kernel Time Maj pf Min pf Swaps ---------- ----- ------ ------ ----- 2.2.0-pre5 18:19 522333 493803 27984 arcavm10 19:57 556299 494163 12035 arcavm9 19:55 553783 494444 12077 arcavm7 18:39 538520 493287 11526 Pre5 looks good. Arcavm7 still looks better than arcavm10. -Steve -- This is a majordomo managed list. To unsubscribe, send a message with the body 'unsubscribe linux-mm me@address' to: majordomo@kvack.org