* Daniel Wagner <daniel.wag...@bmw-carit.de> wrote:
> The machine has 0.5TB memory and doesn't seem to be really concerned about
> 'make -j200'
>
> make clean && time make -j200
>
> mainline 4.1.0
> 2nd run
> real 1m7.595s
> user 28m43.125s
> sys 3m48.189s
>
>
> tip v4.1-2756-ge3d06bd
> 2nd run
> real 1m6.871s
> user 28m50.803s
> sys 3m50.223s
> 3rd run
> real 1m6.974s
> user 28m52.093s
> sys 3m50.259s
>
>
> tip v4.1-2769-g6ce2591 (percpu-rwsem)
> 2nd run
> real 1m7.847s
> user 29m0.439s
> sys 3m51.181s
> 3rd run
> real 1m7.113s
> user 29m3.127s
> sys 3m51.516s
>
>
>
> Compared to 'make -j64' on tip v4.1-2756-ge3d06bd
> 2nd run
> real 1m7.605s
> user 28m3.121s
> sys 3m52.541s
Btw., instead of just listing the raw runs, you can get an automatic average
and
stddev numbers with this:
$ perf stat --null --repeat 5 --pre 'make clean' --post 'sync' make -j200
Performance counter stats for 'make -j200' (3 runs):
29.068162979 seconds time elapsed
( +- 0.27% )
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
