Hi! I made some test with 2.6.12-rc6-RT-V0.7.48-06 and 2.6.12-rc6 kernels. Here is my results: 2.6.12-rc6-RT-V0.7.48-0 2.6.12-rc6 ------------------------------------ ---------------- ./hackbench 30 1st run: 6.139 5.110 2nd run: 6.119 4.946 3rd run: 6.135 5.168 ./hackbench 100 1st run: 23.254 16.603 2nd run: 23.481 16.478 3rd run: 23.790 16.387 ./hackbench 130 1st run: 33.395 21.731 2nd run: 32.652 21.821 3rd run: 32.517 21.698 ./hackbench 150 1st run: 89.100 47.862 2nd run: 39.308 25.121 3rd run: 90.157 25.125 It seems to me 2.6.12-rc faster than 2.6.12-rc6-RT-V0.7.48-0. It is normal? thanks, - mg
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ez az =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=FCzenetr=E9sz?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_digit=E1lis?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_al=E1=EDr=E1ssal?= van =?ISO-8859-1?Q?ell=E1tva?=
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: hackbench: 2.6.12-rc6 vs. 2.6.12-rc6-RT-V0.7.48-06
- From: Esben Nielsen <[email protected]>
- Re: hackbench: 2.6.12-rc6 vs. 2.6.12-rc6-RT-V0.7.48-06
- Prev by Date: [PATCH] cciss 2.6 DMA mapping
- Next by Date: Re: DMA mapping (was Re: [PATCH] cciss 2.6; replaces DMA masks with kernel defines)
- Previous by thread: [PATCH] cciss 2.6 DMA mapping
- Next by thread: Re: hackbench: 2.6.12-rc6 vs. 2.6.12-rc6-RT-V0.7.48-06
- Index(es):