Heiko Schocher <[email protected]> wrote on 2010/03/08 08:46:29:
>
> Hello Joakim,
>
> Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> [...]
> > What would be interesting is to skip patch 3 and turn off
> > MODULES add PIN_TLB and compare that against your unpatched .33 but
> > with MODULES off and PIN_TLB on
>
> run version
>
> 1-4 Linux2.6.33-rc without module support and PIN_TLB=on
> 5-8 Linux2.6.33-rc without module support and PIN_TLB=on + patches 1,2,4
>
> L M B E N C H 3 . 0 S U M M A R Y
> ------------------------------------
> (Alpha software, do not distribute)
hmm, these results varies a lot. The only stable result I can see is:
> Memory latencies in nanoseconds - smaller is better
> (WARNING - may not be correct, check graphs)
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Host OS Mhz L1 $ L2 $ Main mem Rand mem Guesses
> --------- ------------- --- ---- ---- -------- -------- -------
> tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.7 183.2 184.0 1163.0 No L2
> cache?
> tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.7 183.2 184.0 1164.8 No L2
> cache?
> tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.7 183.2 184.0 1163.2 No L2
> cache?
> tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.7 183.2 183.8 1163.7 No L2
> cache?
> tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.8 172.4 173.2 1147.3 No L2
> cache?
> tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.8 172.5 173.2 1148.3 No L2
> cache?
> tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.8 172.5 173.1 1146.9 No L2
> cache?
> tqm8xx Linux 2.6.33- 66 31.8 172.5 173.2 1147.3 No L2
> cache?
I don't see why the other results vary so much. Are you using NFS or having
much network
traffic?
Jocke
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
