On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 14:16, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 8/21/05, Con Kolivas <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 11:34, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> > > Hi,
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > > here are kernbench results:
> >
> > Nice to see you using kernbench :)
> >
> > > ./kernbench -M -o 128
> > > [..]
> > > Average Optimal -j 128 Load Run:
> >
> > Was there any reason you chose 128? Optimal usually works out
> > automatically from kernbench to 4x number_cpus. If I recall correctly you
> > have 4 cpus? Not sure what 128 represents.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Con
>
> No, I just have 1 pentium 4 with ht ;).
>
> Why I chose 128? I just want very high loads. Now I'll try -j192 and
> -j256, but I don't know how does my system survive it.
Well it will survive all right, but eventually get into swap thrash territory
and that's not a meaningful cpu scheduler benchmark.
Cheers,
Con
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |