Dave Jones wrote:
>On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 07:40:22PM +0300, Hans Reiser wrote:
>
> > >> Try running with the -E option for gcc, it might be less CPU intensive,
> > >> and thus a better FS benchmark.
> > >> What do you think?
> > >It's hardly a realistic real-world benchmark if you start nobbling
> > >bits of it though. Not reading the preprocessed output is sure
> > >to bump the benchmark points on an fs optimised for lots of small
> > >writes.
> > Sigh. The alternative is to strace the compile, write a perl scipt or
> > something to get just the FS related calls out of it, and then create a
> > program with just the FS related calls. gcc -E sounds easier to me.;-)
>
>It still seems like perverting a benchmark to turn it into dbench to me.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
Easier is not always correct.;-) We need better benchmarks in our
field, sigh.... and correct ones are really a lot of work....
-- Hans- 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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 31 2003 - 22:00:26 EST