On Thu, 13 Nov 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
The good news is that I seem to actualluy see a bit of a win from this even on a disk, now that the kernel doesn't serialize things. So it may be worth it. So I have some hope that it actually helps on NFS too. The numbers for five runs (with clearing of the caches in between, of course) are: Before: 0.01user 0.23system 0:10.87elapsed 2%CPU 0.04user 0.19system 0:10.86elapsed 2%CPU 0.03user 0.26system 0:10.82elapsed 2%CPU 0.02user 0.27system 0:12.67elapsed 2%CPU 0.01user 0.22system 0:10.86elapsed 2%CPU After: 0.03user 0.26system 0:07.88elapsed 3%CPU 0.02user 0.25system 0:07.63elapsed 3%CPU 0.01user 0.26system 0:08.62elapsed 3%CPU 0.01user 0.26system 0:07.27elapsed 3%CPU 0.05user 0.28system 0:08.61elapsed 3%CPU so it really does seem like it has possibly given a 30% improvement in cold-cache performance even on a disk.
On an NFS kernel checkout I get the following elapsed times: master: 0:02.78 0:02.70 0:02.43 0:02.28 0:02.71 0:02.80 0:02.60 0:02.06 0:02.00 master + new patch: 0:00.77 0:00.83 0:01.02 0:00.77 0:00.91 0:00.78 0:00.78 0:01.09 0:01.00 -- Julian --- There are no accidents whatsoever in the universe. -- Baba Ram Dass -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
