Re: re-aim - 2.5.69, -mm6

[Cliff White]

> Cliff White <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> >  This is the result of running the Reaim test against the 
> >  2.5.69 and 2.5.69-mm6 kernels. The -mm kernels are a bit
> >  slower, and i'm wondering if i'm missing a tuning knob somewhere..
> >  advice appreciated.
> 
> I can look into the slowdown.  Could you please tell me exactly how you are
> invoking the benchmark?  Show me what commands you're using, so I can do
> exactly the same thing.

For these runs, i'm using the STP wrap.sh - you can get that kit from stp cvs 
if you need.
The wrap.sh does the disk setup and a few other things,then invokes the test. 

The two runs are done like this -> (4 cpu machine)
./reaim -s4 -x -t -i4 -f workfile.new_dbase -r3 -b -lstp.config -> for the 
maxjobs convergence
./reaim -s4 -q -t -i4 -f workfile.new_dbase -r3 -b -lstp.config -> for the 
'quick' convergence

stp.config has the poolsizes and path for disk directories:
FILESIZE 80k
POOLSIZE 1024k
DISKDIR /mnt/disk1
DISKDIR /mnt/disk2
DISKDIR /mnt/disk3
DISKDIR /mnt/disk4

Options: 
the -b surpresseses stdout and creates an html version of the report. - this 
is for STP and
not necessary. 
the -r3 runs the test three times
-t turns off the adaptive increment

cliffw

> 
> >  Attempting a second pass of -mm7 caused the hang reported earlier. 
> 
> I have a bad feeling I won't be able to reproduce this.  If you could
> capture the output from a sysrq-T (or "echo t > /proc/sysrq-trigger") then
> that would help a lot.
> 
> It could be a hole in the new dynamic request allocation code, or a driver
> problem.  Or something else.
>