2001-10-18 06:51:15

by Josh McKinney

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Fwd: VM testing with mtest, 2.4.12-ac3, 2.4.12-ac3+riel's patches, and 2.4.13aa1

Averages for 10 mtest01 runs
bytes allocated: 288148684.8
User time (seconds): 5.496
System time (seconds): 3.003
Elapsed (wall clock) time: 12.250
Percent of CPU this job got: 68.9%
Major (requiring I/O) page faults: 103.5
Minor (reclaiming a frame) faults: 70380.6


Attachments:
(No filename) (1.12 kB)
2.4.12-ac3.mtest_summary.log (329.00 B)
vmstat-2.4.12-ac3.log.gz (2.18 kB)
2.4.12-ac3+riel_patches.mtest_summary.log (331.00 B)
vmstat-2.4.12-ac3+riel_patches.log.gz (2.27 kB)
2.4.13-pre3.mtest_summary.log (332.00 B)
vmstat-2.4.13-pre3.log.gz (63.31 kB)
Download all attachments

2001-10-18 15:06:44

by Andreas Dilger

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: Fwd: VM testing with mtest, 2.4.12-ac3, 2.4.12-ac3+riel's patches, and 2.4.13aa1

On Oct 18, 2001 01:51 -0500, Josh McKinney wrote:
> This is a report of the mtest01 scripts posted by [email protected]
> a day orso ago.
>
> The numbers are rather interesting. While the latency of the ac kernels is
> definitely better, the song only dropped out for a second or two in the
> begining but that was it. The aa kernel drops out more frequently throughout
> the test, but the amount of memory allocated is almost twice as much as with
> the ac kernels.

-ac kernel:
> Averages for 10 mtest01 runs
> bytes allocated: 134427443.2
> User time (seconds): 2.546
> System time (seconds): 1.370
> Elapsed (wall clock) time: 4.798
> Percent of CPU this job got: 89.1%
> Major (requiring I/O) page faults: 103.8
> Minor (reclaiming a frame) faults: 32702

-ac kernel + Rik's patches:
> Averages for 10 mtest01 runs
> bytes allocated: 124885401.6
> User time (seconds): 2.380
> System time (seconds): 1.253
> Elapsed (wall clock) time: 4.401
> Percent of CPU this job got: 89.1%
> Major (requiring I/O) page faults: 100.2
> Minor (reclaiming a frame) faults: 30363.3

Linus kernel:
> Averages for 10 mtest01 runs
> bytes allocated: 288148684.8
> User time (seconds): 5.496
> System time (seconds): 3.003
> Elapsed (wall clock) time: 12.250
> Percent of CPU this job got: 68.9%
> Major (requiring I/O) page faults: 103.5
> Minor (reclaiming a frame) faults: 70380.6

Note that the Linus kernel has allocated twice as much memory. What does that
mean exactly? The user/system/wall time is also twice as high. Somehow I
don't think you are having an equal test.

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
\ would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?"
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/ -- Dogbert

2001-10-18 17:26:12

by Josh McKinney

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: Fwd: VM testing with mtest, 2.4.12-ac3, 2.4.12-ac3+riel's patches, and 2.4.13aa1

On approximately Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 09:06:46AM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Oct 18, 2001 01:51 -0500, Josh McKinney wrote:
> > This is a report of the mtest01 scripts posted by [email protected]
> > a day orso ago.
> >
> > The numbers are rather interesting. While the latency of the ac kernels is
> > definitely better, the song only dropped out for a second or two in the
> > begining but that was it. The aa kernel drops out more frequently throughout
> > the test, but the amount of memory allocated is almost twice as much as with
> > the ac kernels.
>
> -ac kernel:
> > Averages for 10 mtest01 runs
> > bytes allocated: 134427443.2
> > User time (seconds): 2.546
> > System time (seconds): 1.370
> > Elapsed (wall clock) time: 4.798
> > Percent of CPU this job got: 89.1%
> > Major (requiring I/O) page faults: 103.8
> > Minor (reclaiming a frame) faults: 32702
>
> -ac kernel + Rik's patches:
> > Averages for 10 mtest01 runs
> > bytes allocated: 124885401.6
> > User time (seconds): 2.380
> > System time (seconds): 1.253
> > Elapsed (wall clock) time: 4.401
> > Percent of CPU this job got: 89.1%
> > Major (requiring I/O) page faults: 100.2
> > Minor (reclaiming a frame) faults: 30363.3
>
> Linus kernel:
> > Averages for 10 mtest01 runs
> > bytes allocated: 288148684.8
> > User time (seconds): 5.496
> > System time (seconds): 3.003
> > Elapsed (wall clock) time: 12.250
> > Percent of CPU this job got: 68.9%
> > Major (requiring I/O) page faults: 103.5
> > Minor (reclaiming a frame) faults: 70380.6
>
> Note that the Linus kernel has allocated twice as much memory. What does that
> mean exactly? The user/system/wall time is also twice as high. Somehow I
> don't think you are having an equal test.
>
> Cheers, Andreas

I thought that was strange myself, which is why I metioned it in the begining.
Also when I seen the results I reran the tests, all in single user mode,
freshreboot, put linux single on the CL, voila, sh mtest01.sh & mpg123 some.mp3,
and there is my test. I know the numbers are crazy and I also know the
importance of having all other variables the same.

Josh
--
Linux, the choice | Animals can be driven crazy by putting too
of a GNU generation -o) | many in too small a pen. Homo sapiens is
Kernel 2.4.13-pre3 /\ | the only animal that voluntarily does this
on a i586 _\_v | to himself. -- Lazarus Long
|