Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 28 Sep 2002 19:54:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 28 Sep 2002 19:54:36 -0400 Received: from c16598.thoms1.vic.optusnet.com.au ([210.49.243.217]:17867 "HELO pc.kolivas.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sat, 28 Sep 2002 19:54:34 -0400 Message-ID: <1033257590.3d964276e10e6@kolivas.net> Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 09:59:50 +1000 From: Con Kolivas To: Paolo Ciarrocchi Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.5.39 with contest 0.41 References: <20020928151726.18496.qmail@linuxmail.org> In-Reply-To: <20020928151726.18496.qmail@linuxmail.org> 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: 3662 Lines: 74 Quoting Paolo Ciarrocchi : > noload: > Kernel Time CPU Ratio > 2.4.19 133.07 98% 1.00 > 2.4.19 133.16 98% 1.00 > 2.4.19 135.43 97% 1.02 > 2.5.38-mm2 138.19 97% 1.04 > 2.5.38-mm2 138.47 96% 1.04 > 2.5.38-mm2 139.54 96% 1.05 > 2.5.39 138.30 96% 1.04 > 2.5.39 138.63 96% 1.04 > 2.5.39 139.99 96% 1.05 > > process_load: > Kernel Time CPU Ratio > 2.4.19 200.43 60% 1.51 > 2.4.19 203.11 60% 1.53 > 2.4.19 203.97 59% 1.53 > 2.5.38-mm2 194.42 69% 1.46 > 2.5.38-mm2 195.19 69% 1.47 > 2.5.38-mm2 207.36 64% 1.56 > 2.5.39 190.44 70% 1.43 > 2.5.39 191.37 70% 1.44 > 2.5.39 193.60 69% 1.45 > > io_load: > Kernel Time CPU Ratio > 2.4.19 486.58 27% 3.66 > 2.4.19 593.72 22% 4.46 > 2.4.19 637.61 21% 4.79 > 2.5.38-mm2 232.35 61% 1.75 > 2.5.38-mm2 237.83 57% 1.79 > 2.5.38-mm2 274.39 50% 2.06 > 2.5.39 242.98 57% 1.83 > 2.5.39 294.52 50% 2.21 > 2.5.39 328.01 42% 2.46 > > mem_load: > Kernel Time CPU Ratio > 2.4.19 172.24 78% 1.29 > 2.4.19 174.74 77% 1.31 > 2.4.19 174.87 77% 1.31 > 2.5.38-mm2 165.53 82% 1.24 > 2.5.38-mm2 170.00 80% 1.28 > 2.5.38-mm2 171.96 79% 1.29 > 2.5.39 167.92 81% 1.26 > 2.5.39 170.80 80% 1.28 > 2.5.39 172.68 79% 1.30 Quick statistical analysis: Noload, 2.5.39 is slower than 2.4.19 and same as 2.5.38-mm2 ProcessLoad, 2.5.39 is slower than 2.4.19 and same as 2.5.38-mm2 IO Load, 2.5.39 is faster than 2.4.19 and _appears_ slower than 2.5.38-mm2 but has no statistically significant difference; This is probably a type 2 error (meaning more samples are required). Paolo if you could perform three more runs on these two kernels it would help discriminate for those in the crowd who need firm proof. Mem Load, 2.5.39 is faster than 2.4.19 and same as 2.5.38-mm2 Note that for the results to be useful, they need to be run back to back on the same system as you seem to have done. If you use your machine between runs for something else, it can and probably will affect any further results. 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/