Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 01 May 2002 21:46:25 +0200
From:      Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>
To:        Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu>
Cc:        freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: hlt when idle? 
Message-ID:  <68722.1020282385@critter.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 01 May 2002 15:34:09 EDT." <15568.17201.80743.521864@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <15568.17201.80743.521864@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>, Andrew Gallatin 
writes:

>FWIW, I just did a -j8 buildworld with & without HLT.  The times were
>nearly identical, with the HLT kernel being ~15 seconds faster (real
>time) and using 56 seconds less system time.  With a sample size of 1,
>I admit its hard to make any meaningful performance comparisons;
>but the system seems roughly as fast & did not deadlock.
>
>At least on these machines, the cooler office seems worth the risk ;)
>
>Drew
>
>==> world.log.hlt <==
>     1757.06 real      1694.33 user       674.49 sys
>
>==> world.log <==
>     1771.65 real      1696.62 user       730.04 sys

Your system time looks significant,  the other two are a bit too
close to judge without a standard deviation.


-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?68722.1020282385>