Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 06:29:11 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 06:29:11 -0500 Received: from packet.digeo.com ([12.110.80.53]:60336 "EHLO packet.digeo.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 06:29:10 -0500 Message-ID: <3DF08BC7.62436532@digeo.com> Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 03:36:39 -0800 From: Andrew Morton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.5.46 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Con Kolivas CC: Marc-Christian Petersen , linux kernel mailing list , Andrea Arcangeli Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.4.20-aa1] Readlatency-2 References: <200212061038.27387.m.c.p@wolk-project.de> <200212062045.25377.conman@kolivas.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Dec 2002 11:36:39.0619 (UTC) FILETIME=[BDF17130:01C29D1B] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 844 Lines: 25 Con Kolivas wrote: > > io_load: > Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio > 2.4.20 [5] 203.4 33 40 15 3.07 > 2.4.20aa1 [3] 238.3 27 46 15 3.60 > 2.4.20aa1rl2 [3] 302.5 22 63 16 4.57 Something must have gone wrong here. rl2 cannot be worse than 2.4.20 in this test. Umm, quick sanity check: 2.4.20-rl2 321.44 147% 96 24% 2.4.20 361.70 130% 108 24% So only a 10% speedup, but certainly not a 50% slowdown. (That is on scsi). Maybe a patch preparation problem? - 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/