Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.4.{18,19{-ck9},20rc1{-aa1}} with contest

Andrew Morton (akpm@digeo.com)
Fri, 08 Nov 2002 20:15:07 -0800


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/