Message-ID: <1032964936.3d91cb48b1cca@kolivas.net>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 00:42:16 +1000
From: Con Kolivas <conman@kolivas.net>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
Subject: [BENCHMARK] fork_load module tested for contest
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
Content-Length: 1502
Lines: 39


I've been trialling a new load module for the contest benchmark
(http://contest.kolivas.net) which simply forks a process that does nothing,
waits for it to die, then repeats. Here are the results I have obtained so far:

noload:
Kernel                  Time            CPU             Ratio
2.4.19                  72.90           99%             1.00
2.4.19-ck7              71.55           100%            0.98
2.5.38                  73.86           99%             1.01
2.5.38-mm2              73.93           99%             1.01

fork_load:
Kernel                  Time            CPU             Ratio
2.4.19                  100.05          69%             1.37
2.4.19-ck7              74.65           95%             1.02
2.5.38                  77.35           95%             1.06
2.5.38-mm2              76.99           95%             1.06

ck7 uses O1, preempt, low latency
Preempt=N for all other kernels

Clearly you can see the 2.5 kernels have a substantial lead over the current
stable kernel.

This load module is not part of the contest package yet. I could certainly
change it to fork n processes but I'm not really sure just how many n should be.

Comments?

Con Kolivas

P.S. Results have negligible differences on repeat testing.
-
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/