Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 22 Sep 2002 22:59:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 22 Sep 2002 22:59:16 -0400 Received: from c16598.thoms1.vic.optusnet.com.au ([210.49.243.217]:20870 "HELO pc.kolivas.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sun, 22 Sep 2002 22:59:13 -0400 Message-ID: <1032750261.3d8e84b5486a9@kolivas.net> Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 13:04:21 +1000 From: Con Kolivas To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [BENCHMARK] gcc3.2 v 2.95.3 (contest and linux-2.5.38) 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: 2682 Lines: 66 I performed contest benchmarks on kernel 2.5.38 when the kernel is compiled with gcc3.2 to gcc2.95.3 warning: The following benchmarks may be disturbing to some viewers: No Load: Kernel Time CPU 2.5.38 68.25 99% 2.5.38-gcc32 103.03 99% Process Load: Kernel Time CPU 2.5.38 71.60 95% 2.5.38-gcc32 112.98 91% IO Half Load: Kernel Time CPU 2.5.38 81.26 90% 2.5.38-gcc32 168.25 70% IO Full Load: Kernel Time CPU 2.5.38 170.21 42% 2.5.38-gcc32 1405.25 8% Mem Load: Kernel Time CPU 2.5.38 104.22 70% 2.5.38-gcc32 153.00 74% Both kernels had identical configs and contest was run using gcc2.95.3 (I can't see how this would affect it but tell me if you think it will). The only difference was the original 2.5.38 was compiled with gcc2.95.3 and -gcc32 was compiled with gcc3.2 Note the lower performance even with noload, and the totally abysmal performance under full load. See the logs below for the page fault differences too. Full logs follow: 2.5.38: noload Time: 68.25 CPU: 99% Major Faults: 204613 Minor Faults: 255906 process_load Time: 71.60 CPU: 95% Major Faults: 204019 Minor Faults: 255238 io_halfmem Time: 81.26 CPU: 90% Major Faults: 204019 Minor Faults: 255325 Was writing number 4 of a 112Mb sized io_load file after 90 seconds io_fullmem Time: 170.21 CPU: 42% Major Faults: 204019 Minor Faults: 255272 Was writing number 6 of a 224Mb sized io_load file after 194 seconds mem_load Time: 104.22 CPU: 70% Major Faults: 204120 Minor Faults: 256271 2.5.38-gcc32: noload Time: 103.03 CPU: 99% Major Faults: 237750 Minor Faults: 439982 process_load Time: 112.98 CPU: 91% Major Faults: 236958 Minor Faults: 439030 io_halfmem Time: 168.25 CPU: 70% Major Faults: 236958 Minor Faults: 439261 Was writing number 16 of a 112Mb sized io_load file after 202 seconds io_fullmem Time: 1405.25 CPU: 8% Major Faults: 237199 Minor Faults: 440233 Was writing number 59 of a 224Mb sized io_load file after 1496 seconds mem_load Time: 153.00 CPU: 74% Major Faults: 237863 Minor Faults: 440524 These are disturbing to me. Comments? 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/