Re: Major regression on hackbench with SLUB (more numbers)

[Ingo Molnar]

* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hackbench seems to show this regression the most. In my tests I didn't 
> see much change with kernel builds and such, but the focus was on 
> scheduling not memory management. I'll run my kernel tests next for 
> both SLAB and SLUB and see if there's any difference there.

i just ran various benchmarks on an 8-way (8x 700 MHz Xeon, 4GB RAM):

      AVG      v2.6.24.slab     v2.6.24.slub         [ smaller is better ]
   -----------------------------------------
            mmap:   1052.66          1049.33   (  0%)
           ctx-2:      4.32             4.30   (  0%)
          select:     41.95            43.69   (  4%)
       proc-exec:    394.45           391.92   (  0%)
    hackbench-10:      1.12             2.99   (166%)
    hackbench-20:      2.04             6.67   (226%)
    hackbench-50:      5.03            17.50   (247%)

and hackbench overhead stands out, by a huge margin. Other stuff is 
within measurement noise. Neither SLUB nor SLAB debugging was turned on, 
all other debugging options were off too.

	Ingo
--
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/