Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261896AbTHaOAo (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 Aug 2003 10:00:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262027AbTHaOAo (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 Aug 2003 10:00:44 -0400 Received: from smtp.bitmover.com ([192.132.92.12]:9926 "EHLO smtp.bitmover.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261896AbTHaOAn (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 Aug 2003 10:00:43 -0400 Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 07:00:37 -0700 From: Larry McVoy To: Dan Kegel Cc: GCC Mailing List , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: LMbench as gcc performance regression test? Message-ID: <20030831140037.GA16620@work.bitmover.com> Mail-Followup-To: Larry McVoy , Dan Kegel , GCC Mailing List , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <3F51A201.8090108@kegel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F51A201.8090108@kegel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam (whitelisted), SpamAssassin (score=0.3, required 7, AWL) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 787 Lines: 18 On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 12:21:37AM -0700, Dan Kegel wrote: > (There seems to be large variations in successive runs of LMBench > when I try it, so it may take me a bit of work to get repeatable > results.) Other than the context switch part or anything based on it, that shouldn't be true, it should be very stable. I'm pretty convinced that the variations are due to different pages being allocated and the result cache contention makes things bounce. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm - 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/