Re: [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was: Strange performance behavior of 2.4.0-test9)

From: kumon@flab.fujitsu.co.jp
Date: Mon Oct 30 2000 - 04:27:44 EST

Next message: Ingo Molnar: "Re: 2.2.18Pre Lan Performance Rocks!"
Previous message: Paul Gortmaker: "Re: [patch] NE2000"
In reply to: Andrew Morton: "Re: [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was: Strange performance behavior of 2.4.0-test9)"
Next in thread: Andrew Morton: "Re: [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was: Strange performance behavior of 2.4.0-test9)"
Reply: Andrew Morton: "Re: [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was: Strange performance behavior of 2.4.0-test9)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Andrew Morton writes:
>
> I agree with me. Could you please test the scalability
> of this?

Here is the result, measured on 8-way profusion.

Andrew posted two paches, so called P1 and P2.

Req/s
test10-pre5: 2255 bad performance

---- test9+P2: 5243 test10-pre5+P1: 5187 test10-pre5+P2: 5258

P2 may be a little bit better.

---------- Data summary sorted by the performance: test8 5287 <-- best performance test10-pre5+P2: 5258 test9+P2: 5243 test9+mypatch: 5192 <-- a little bit worse test10-pre5+P1: 5187 test1 3702 <-- no good scalability test10-pre5: 2255 <-- negative scalability test9 2193

The value changes within 30-50 seems fluctuations.

-- Computer Systems Laboratory, Fujitsu Labs. kumon@flab.fujitsu.co.jp - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Ingo Molnar: "Re: 2.2.18Pre Lan Performance Rocks!"
Previous message: Paul Gortmaker: "Re: [patch] NE2000"
In reply to: Andrew Morton: "Re: [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was: Strange performance behavior of 2.4.0-test9)"
Next in thread: Andrew Morton: "Re: [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was: Strange performance behavior of 2.4.0-test9)"
Reply: Andrew Morton: "Re: [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was: Strange performance behavior of 2.4.0-test9)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 31 2000 - 21:00:26 EST