Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 05:22:51 +1100 From: Peter Jeremy <PeterJeremy@optushome.com.au> To: Pete French <petefrench@ticketswitch.com> Cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kernel cpu entries Message-ID: <20051215182250.GO77268@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> In-Reply-To: <E1EmxOE-00053V-7l@dilbert.firstcallgroup.co.uk> References: <20051215173704.GM77268@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> <E1EmxOE-00053V-7l@dilbert.firstcallgroup.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 2005-Dec-15 17:59:38 +0000, Pete French wrote: >Got some curiuous results when I tested this today by the way. >I have a twin processor PIII machine. Did a parallel compile on >it. The actuall wall clock time is faster when I add the 586 >back in. *but* if you look at the user and system times, the >user time has dropped slightly, but the system tme has gone up >a lot. So its doing more work, but with a slghtly greater amount >of parallelism allow it to finish faster in real time. > >Can anyone explain that ???? I can't see anything in the kernel source code to explain it. Since you don't mention actual times, is the difference statistically significant? (see src/tools/tools/ministat) -- Peter Jeremy
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051215182250.GO77268>