[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: More VM benchmarks

To: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: More VM benchmarks
From: Nick Piggin <piggin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 19:42:06 +1100
CC: linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-Reply-To: <40207B67.7040407@cyberone.com.au>
Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mm@kvack.org
References: <40205908.4080600@cyberone.com.au> <40207B67.7040407@cyberone.com.au>
Sender: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040122 Debian/1.6-1

Nick Piggin wrote:

>
>
> Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>> http://www.kerneltrap.org/~npiggin/vm/5/
>>

Sorry to keep replying to myself. I've done some runs
with my IO scheduler regression tests and these patches
don't make a significant difference one way or the other
although the results with the patches are generally a
bit better.

Tested OraSim pgbench nickbench tiobench and the read/ls
kernel tree during a streaming read/write. 256MB RAM
this time.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"aart@kvack.org"> aart@kvack.org </a>

References:
- More VM benchmarks
  - From: Nick Piggin
- Re: More VM benchmarks
  - From: Nick Piggin

Prev by Date: Re: Active Memory Defragmentation: Our implementation & problems
Next by Date: [PATCH 0/5] mm improvements
Prev by thread: Re: More VM benchmarks
Next by thread: VM patches (please review)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread