> -----Original Message-----
> From: Linus Torvalds [mailto:torvalds@transmeta.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 12:40 AM
> To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: lmbench results for 2.4 and 2.5 -- updated results
>
>
> >--page fault (is this significant?)
>
> I don't think so, there's something strange with the lmbench pagefault
> tests, it only has one significant digit of accuracy, and I don't even
> know what it is testing. Because of the single lack of precision, it's
> hard to tell what the real change is.
>
This single digit accuracy is coming from a minor integer division bug
in lmbench.
Appended LMbench patch should resolve it.
Thanks,
-Venkatesh
--- LMbench/src/lat_pagefault.c.org Mon Mar 24 10:40:46 2003
+++ LMbench/src/lat_pagefault.c Mon Mar 24 10:54:34 2003
@@ -67,5 +67,5 @@
n++;
}
use_int(sum);
- fprintf(stderr, "Pagefaults on %s: %d usecs\n", file, usecs/n);
+ fprintf(stderr, "Pagefaults on %s: %f usecs\n", file, (1.0 *
usecs) / n);
}
-
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 : Mon Mar 31 2003 - 22:00:17 EST