Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 12 Oct 2002 19:46:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 12 Oct 2002 19:46:23 -0400 Received: from c17928.thoms1.vic.optusnet.com.au ([210.49.249.29]:17536 "EHLO localhost.localdomain") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id convert rfc822-to-8bit; Sat, 12 Oct 2002 19:46:22 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Con Kolivas To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Benchmark] Contest 0.51 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 09:49:46 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 Cc: Paolo Ciarrocchi MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Message-Id: <200210130949.52013.conman@kolivas.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1029 Lines: 28 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 >It seems useful to me add a colum with CPU%+LCPU%. >It is intersting to notice that 2.5.41 spend 41+9=50% CPU time >for compiling and for the io_load while 2.5.42 spend 45+9=54% >time. Can I say that 2.5.42 is "better" than 2.5.41 ? No I'm afraid not. The lcpu% cant estimate accurately the cpu% used by the load while the kernel is actually being compiled as the load starts before ther kernel compilation and ends after it. This means that lcpu% will always overestimate the loads' cpu%. I haven't found a workaround for this... yet Con -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE9qLUdF6dfvkL3i1gRAmS/AJ49q1Kd1RBZU8bflVd2n5RUi1Q3UQCffNZI 8V14Cm2/xbXk/QMCCoBnIf4= =/fVc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - 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/