From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb•de>
To: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs•org
Cc: Milton Miller <miltonm@bga•com>
Subject: Re: 82xx performance
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 23:45:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200807162345.26395.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DCEAAC0833DD314AB0B58112AD99B93B04B3490E@ismail.innsys.innovsys.com>
On Wednesday 16 July 2008, Rune Torgersen wrote:
> Turns out the story is no so simple.
> I redid the test wih all versions of arch/ppc from 2.6.18 to 2.6.26, and
> also arch/powerpc (2.6.24 and 25, 26 doesn't compile because of binutil
> issues)
>=20
> This time I made very sure that the tests were performed the same way,
> and I made a tabel showing relative performance:
>=20
> kernel =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0compile time =A0 rel =A0 context switch =A0rel
> v2.6.18 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 01:13:33.70 =A01.00 =A0 =A0 =A0 7.2 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A01.00
> v2.6.19 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 01:13:29.21 =A01.00 =A0 =A0 =A0 7.1 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A00.99
> v2.6.20 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 01:13:29.58 =A01.00 =A0 =A0 =A0 2.8 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A00.39
> v2.6.21 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 01:13:24.91 =A01.00 =A0 =A0 =A0 8.1 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A01.13
> v2.6.22 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 01:13:42.72 =A01.00 =A0 =A0 =A0 4.5 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A00.63
> v2.6.23 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 01:15:16.43 =A01.02 =A0 =A0 =A0 17 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 2.36
> v2.6.24 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 01:15:30.90 =A01.03 =A0 =A0 =A0 20 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 2.78
> v2.6.25 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 01:14:51.21 =A01.02 =A0 =A0 =A0 21 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 2.92
> v2.6.26 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 01:14:34.76 =A01.01 =A0 =A0 =A0 23.8 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
3.31
> v2.6.24-powerpc 01:17:41.99 =A01.06 =A0 =A0 =A0 25.8 =A0 =A0 =A0 3.58
> v2.6.25-powerpc 01:18:10.10 =A01.06 =A0 =A0 =A0 35.7 =A0 =A0 =A0 4.96
>=20
> This shows that arch/ppc no matter versin is fairly consistent in speed.
> Arch/powerpc is roughtly 6% worse.
>=20
> The contect swith column is found running lat_ctx 2 from lmbench3, and
> should be in microsecs.
Ok, I think this could be related mostly to two changes:
* In 2.6.23, the process scheduler was replaced, the new one is the CFS,
the 'completely fair scheduler'. This has changed a lot of data.
To verify this, you could check out a git version just before and just
after CFS went in.
* Obviously, the 6 percent change between ppc and powerpc should not
be there. You can still try to use 'readprofile', or oprofile in
timer based mode (i.e. without HW performance counters) to get some
more data about where the time is spent on an identical kernel version.
Arnd <><
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-16 21:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-14 16:34 82xx performance Rune Torgersen
2008-07-14 20:44 ` Arnd Bergmann
2008-07-15 14:16 ` Rune Torgersen
2008-07-15 18:25 ` Rune Torgersen
2008-07-15 19:50 ` Arnd Bergmann
2008-07-16 21:08 ` Rune Torgersen
2008-07-16 21:45 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2008-07-16 21:53 ` Rune Torgersen
2008-07-16 22:32 ` Arnd Bergmann
2008-07-17 15:12 ` Rune Torgersen
2008-07-17 15:47 ` Arnd Bergmann
2008-07-17 15:52 ` Rune Torgersen
2008-07-17 18:24 ` Rune Torgersen
2008-07-17 19:43 ` Arnd Bergmann
2008-07-17 19:54 ` Rune Torgersen
2008-07-17 21:32 ` Arnd Bergmann
2008-07-25 20:41 ` Rune Torgersen
2008-07-26 3:47 ` Milton Miller
2008-07-15 15:57 ` Milton Miller
2008-07-15 18:12 ` Rune Torgersen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200807162345.26395.arnd@arndb.de \
--to=arnd@arndb$(echo .)de \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs$(echo .)org \
--cc=miltonm@bga$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox