Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 09:44:23 -0500 (EST) From: Chuck Robey <chuckr@Glue.umd.edu> To: Wolfram Schneider <wosch@cs.tu-berlin.de> Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>, smp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Some SMP timing tests. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971103094335.7198A-100000@picnic.mat.net> In-Reply-To: <p1i7maqgzz1.fsf@panke.panke.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 3 Nov 1997, Wolfram Schneider wrote: > Chuck Robey <chuckr@Glue.umd.edu> writes: > > OK, I tried it. I started with no obj at all, did a make obj outside the > > timing loop, just so that I knew it was completely clean. This goes for > > both runs. The first one is before the patches were inserted, the second > > one after. Both on a Tyan Titan II, 2 each PPro 166's e/w 512K cache > > each, 64 Megs main memory. I have set the source on the first disk, the > > obj on the second, and swap evenly distributed between the two. Here's > > the results: > > > > before patching-> > > > > /usr/bin/time -l make -j 12 buildworld: > > 5389.14 real 3229.98 user 2902.01 sys > > With patched Makefile and bsd.subdir.mk, same command: > > 2780.55 real 1696.39 user 1571.73 sys > > I doubt that the patch can reduce the time up to 50%. I wondered about that too, but I made the conditions as identical as I could. I wonder what I missed? > > -- > Wolfram Schneider <wosch@apfel.de> http://www.apfel.de/~wosch/ > > ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chuckr@glue.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 213 Lakeside Drive Apt T-1 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run Journey2 and picnic, both FreeBSD (301) 220-2114 | version 3.0 current -- and great FUN! ----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.971103094335.7198A-100000>