Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 19 Sep 2002 04:09:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 19 Sep 2002 04:09:17 -0400 Received: from c16598.thoms1.vic.optusnet.com.au ([210.49.243.217]:36589 "HELO pc.kolivas.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 19 Sep 2002 04:09:14 -0400 Message-ID: <1032423255.3d89875787cb4@kolivas.net> Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 18:14:15 +1000 From: Con Kolivas To: Daniel Phillips Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] contest results for 2.5.36 References:

In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1238 Lines: 32 Quoting Daniel Phillips : > On Wednesday 18 September 2002 18:50, Rik van Riel wrote: > > On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > > No Load: > > > > Kernel Time CPU > > > > 2.4.19 68.14 99% > > > > 2.4.20-pre7 68.11 99% > > > > 2.5.34 69.88 99% > > > > 2.4.19-ck7 68.40 98% > > > > 2.4.19-ck7-rmap 68.73 99% > > > > 2.4.19-cc 68.37 99% > > > > 2.5.36 69.58 99% > > > > > > page_add/remove_rmap. Be interesting to test an Alan kernel too. > > > > Yes, but why are page_add/remove_rmap slower in 2.5 than in > > Con's -rmap kernel ? ;) > > I don't know what you guys are going on about, these differences are > getting close to statistically insignificant. These ones definitely are insignificant. I've found the limit with repeat measurements about +/- 1% Con. - 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/