Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 13 Jan 2002 15:24:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 13 Jan 2002 15:24:36 -0500 Received: from lilly.ping.de ([62.72.90.2]:26380 "HELO lilly.ping.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sun, 13 Jan 2002 15:24:21 -0500 Date: 13 Jan 2002 21:17:31 +0100 Message-ID: <20020113211731.A6543@planetzork.spacenet> From: jogi@planetzork.ping.de To: "Robert Love" Cc: "Andrew Morton" , "Ed Sweetman" , "Andrea Arcangeli" , yodaiken@fsmlabs.com, "Alan Cox" , nigel@nrg.org, "Rob Landley" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable In-Reply-To: <1010781207.819.27.camel@phantasy> <20020112121315.B1482@inspiron.school.suse.de> <20020112160714.A10847@planetzork.spacenet> <20020112095209.A5735@hq.fsmlabs.com> <20020112180016.T1482@inspiron.school.suse.de> <005301c19b9b$6acc61e0$0501a8c0@psuedogod> <3C409B2D.DB95D659@zip.com.au> <20020113184249.A15955@planetzork.spacenet> <1010946178.11848.14.camel@phantasy> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.15i In-Reply-To: <1010946178.11848.14.camel@phantasy>; from rml@tech9.net on Sun, Jan 13, 2002 at 01:22:57PM -0500 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jan 13, 2002 at 01:22:57PM -0500, Robert Love wrote: > On Sun, 2002-01-13 at 12:42, jogi@planetzork.ping.de wrote: > > > 13-pre5aa1 18-pre2aa2 18-pre3 18-pre3s 18-pre3sp 18-pre3minill > > j100: 6:59.79 78% 7:07.62 76% * 6:39.55 81% 6:24.79 83% * > > j100: 7:03.39 77% 8:10.04 66% * 8:07.13 66% 6:21.23 83% * > > j100: 6:40.40 81% 7:43.15 70% * 6:37.46 81% 6:03.68 87% * > > j100: 7:45.12 70% 7:11.59 75% * 7:14.46 74% 6:06.98 87% * > > j100: 6:56.71 79% 7:36.12 71% * 6:26.59 83% 6:11.30 86% * > > > > j75: 6:22.33 85% 6:42.50 81% 6:48.83 80% 6:01.61 89% 5:42.66 93% 7:07.56 77% > > j75: 6:41.47 81% 7:19.79 74% 6:49.43 79% 5:59.82 89% 6:00.83 88% 7:17.15 74% > > j75: 6:10.32 88% 6:44.98 80% 7:01.01 77% 6:02.99 88% 5:48.00 91% 6:47.48 80% > > j75: 6:28.55 84% 6:44.21 80% 9:33.78 57% 6:19.83 85% 5:49.07 91% 6:34.02 83% > > j75: 6:17.15 86% 6:46.58 80% 7:24.52 73% 6:23.50 84% 5:58.06 88% 7:01.39 77% > > Again, preempt seems to reign supreme. Where is all the information > correlating preempt is inferior? To be fair, however, we should bench a > mini-ll+s test. Your wish is granted. Here are the results for mini-ll + scheduler: j100: 8:26.54 j100: 7:50.35 j100: 6:49.59 j100: 6:39.30 j100: 6:39.70 j75: 6:01.02 j75: 6:12.16 j75: 6:04.60 j75: 6:24.58 j75: 6:28.00 Jogi -- Well, yeah ... I suppose there's no point in getting greedy, is there? << Calvin & Hobbes >> - 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/