Hi All/Andrew,
I've just compiled 2.5.33-mm5 (in the test report is 2.5.33M) and ran LMbench on it.
2.5.33 is preemption ON
2.5.33x is preemption OFF
2.5.33M is -mm5 preemption OFF
cd results && make summary percent 2>/dev/null | more
make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/src/LMbench/results'
L M B E N C H 2 . 0 S U M M A R Y
------------------------------------
Basic system parameters
----------------------------------------------------
Host OS Description Mhz
--------- ------------- ----------------------- ----
frodo Linux 2.4.18 i686-pc-linux-gnu 797
frodo Linux 2.4.19 i686-pc-linux-gnu 797
frodo Linux 2.5.33 i686-pc-linux-gnu 797
frodo Linux 2.5.33x i686-pc-linux-gnu 797
frodo Linux 2.5.33M i686-pc-linux-gnu 797
Processor, Processes - times in microseconds - smaller is better
----------------------------------------------------------------
Host OS Mhz null null open selct sig sig fork exec sh
call I/O stat clos TCP inst hndl proc proc proc
--------- ------------- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
frodo Linux 2.4.18 797 0.40 0.56 3.18 3.97 1.00 3.18 115. 1231 13.K
frodo Linux 2.4.19 797 0.40 0.56 3.07 3.88 1.00 3.19 129. 1113 13.K
frodo Linux 2.5.33 797 0.40 0.61 3.78 4.76 1.02 3.37 201. 1458 13.K
frodo Linux 2.5.33x 797 0.40 0.60 3.51 4.38 1.02 3.27 159. 1430 13.K
frodo Linux 2.5.33M 797 0.40 0.59 3.48 4.37 1.01 3.35 170. 1455 14.K
Context switching - times in microseconds - smaller is better
-------------------------------------------------------------
Host OS 2p/0K 2p/16K 2p/64K 8p/16K 8p/64K 16p/16K 16p/64K
ctxsw ctxsw ctxsw ctxsw ctxsw ctxsw ctxsw
--------- ------------- ----- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------- -------
frodo Linux 2.4.18 0.990 4.4200 13.8 6.2700 309.8 58.6 310.5
frodo Linux 2.4.19 0.900 4.2900 15.3 5.9100 309.6 57.7 309.9
frodo Linux 2.5.33 1.620 5.2800 15.3 9.3500 312.7 54.9 312.7
frodo Linux 2.5.33x 1.040 4.3200 17.8 7.6200 312.5 49.9 312.5
frodo Linux 2.5.33M 0.700 4.2700 14.0 8.7200 312.2 42.3 311.9
*Local* Communication latencies in microseconds - smaller is better
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Host OS 2p/0K Pipe AF UDP RPC/ TCP RPC/ TCP
ctxsw UNIX UDP TCP conn
--------- ------------- ----- ----- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----
frodo Linux 2.4.18 0.990 4.437 8.66
frodo Linux 2.4.19 0.900 4.561 7.76
frodo Linux 2.5.33 1.620 6.497 9.11
frodo Linux 2.5.33x 1.040 4.888 8.70
frodo Linux 2.5.33M 0.700 4.564 8.25
File & VM system latencies in microseconds - smaller is better
--------------------------------------------------------------
Host OS 0K File 10K File Mmap Prot Page
Create Delete Create Delete Latency Fault Fault
--------- ------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------- ----- -----
frodo Linux 2.4.18 68.9 16.0 185.8 31.6 425.0 0.789 2.00000
frodo Linux 2.4.19 68.9 14.9 186.5 29.8 416.0 0.798 2.00000
frodo Linux 2.5.33 77.8 19.1 211.6 38.3 774.0 0.832 3.00000
frodo Linux 2.5.33x 77.2 18.8 206.7 37.0 769.0 0.823 3.00000
frodo Linux 2.5.33M 73.0 16.8 200.4 35.6 734.0 0.777 3.00000
*Local* Communication bandwidths in MB/s - bigger is better
-----------------------------------------------------------
Host OS Pipe AF TCP File Mmap Bcopy Bcopy Mem Mem
UNIX reread reread (libc) (hand) read write
--------- ------------- ---- ---- ---- ------ ------ ------ ------ ---- -----
frodo Linux 2.4.18 810. 650. 181.7 203.7 101.5 101.4 203. 195.3
frodo Linux 2.4.19 808. 680. 187.2 203.8 101.5 101.4 203. 190.1
frodo Linux 2.5.33 571. 636. 185.6 202.5 100.5 100.4 202. 190.3
frodo Linux 2.5.33x 768. 710. 185.4 202.5 100.5 100.4 202. 189.5
frodo Linux 2.5.33M 764. 707. 185.4 202.4 100.5 100.4 202. 185.8
Memory latencies in nanoseconds - smaller is better
(WARNING - may not be correct, check graphs)
---------------------------------------------------
Host OS Mhz L1 $ L2 $ Main mem Guesses
--------- ------------- ---- ----- ------ -------- -------
frodo Linux 2.4.18 797 3.767 8.7890 158.9
frodo Linux 2.4.19 797 3.767 8.7980 158.9
frodo Linux 2.5.33 797 3.798 8.8660 160.1
frodo Linux 2.5.33x 797 3.796 45.5 160.2
frodo Linux 2.5.33M 797 3.797 8.8660 160.2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/LMbench/results'
Ciao,
Paolo
--
Get your free email from http://www.linuxmail.org
Powered by Outblaze
Axel Siebenwirth wrote:
>
> Hi Andrew!
>
> On Sat, 07 Sep 2002, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > I'd appreciate it if people could grab this one, be nasty to it
> > and send a report.
>
> What are your favorite tests to run? I'd like to send you some useful test
> results. But which do you like to see?
I've already run my favourite tests ;) The value of external testing is
in the extra coverage which it gives - different hardware, different
tests. And also different requirements: there may be things which I
think are cool, but which you think suck.
So... The real test is of course "daily use". If it works OK in daily
use for you, and for everyone else then we ship 2.6. By definition.
Of course, on top of daily use it is best to run additional stress
tests to find problems more quickly. Large desktop applications, web
and file servers, databases, etc would be interesting. CD burning,
funny old PIO-mode IDE drives, stress testing with gigabt NICs,
you name it. Coverage.
On Sunday 08 September 2002 18:45, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Axel Siebenwirth wrote:
> >
> > Hi Andrew!
> >
> > On Sat, 07 Sep 2002, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > > I'd appreciate it if people could grab this one, be nasty to it
> > > and send a report.
> >
> > What are your favorite tests to run? I'd like to send you some useful test
> > results. But which do you like to see?
>
> I've already run my favourite tests ;)
How about some swap-intensive comparisons to 2.4.19?
--
Daniel