> Now if 2.4 has worse _performance_ than 2.2 due to one
> reason or another, that I'd like to hear about ;)
>
Oh, well, it seems that I was wrong. :)
First test: hogmem 180 5 = allocate 180MB and dirty it 5 times (on a
192MB machine)
kernel | swap usage | speed
-------------------------------
2.2.17 | 48 MB | 11.8 MB/s
-------------------------------
2.4.0 | 206 MB | 11.1 MB/s
-------------------------------
So 2.2 is only marginally faster. Also it can be seen that 2.4 uses 4
times more swap space. If Linus says it's ok... :)
Second test: kernel compile make -j32 (empirically this puts the VM
under load, but not excessively!)
2.2.17 -> make -j32 392.49s user 47.87s system 168% cpu 4:21.13 total
2.4.0 -> make -j32 389.59s user 31.29s system 182% cpu 3:50.24 total
Now, is this great news or what, 2.4.0 is definitely faster.
-- Zlatko - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/