Re: [Patch 0/4] Reordering of functions, try 2
- From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 16:43:15 +0100
Andi Kleen wrote:
On Monday 27 February 2006 16:23, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
2) In the "processor/processes" group, 7 tests changed behavior, and the
average of these changes was a performance increase by 10% (!!). The
exception was the signal handling test, which decreased by 6%. This
actually made me feel good, since the original function list was based
on a profile run that didn't do signals much if at all.
How often did you rerun lmbench each time?
I ran it 5 times each time and then took the average of the runs
(yes that takes forever)
In my experience the numbers
are somewhat unstable. Still looks encouraging.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- [Patch 0/4] Reordering of functions, try 2
- From: Arjan van de Ven
- Re: [Patch 0/4] Reordering of functions, try 2
- From: Andi Kleen
- [Patch 0/4] Reordering of functions, try 2
- Prev by Date: Re: [Patch 3/4] Move the base kernel to 2Mb to align with TLB boundaries
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 3/7] inflate pt1: clean up input logic
- Previous by thread: Re: [Patch 0/4] Reordering of functions, try 2
- Next by thread: Integration of clustering (mosix) into mainline
- Index(es):