Subject: Re: Performane comparisons, 1.3.3-current
To: Frank van der Linden <fvdl@wasabisystems.com>
From: Ken Wellsch <kwellsch@tampabay.rr.com>
List: tech-perform
Date: 02/24/2001 15:37:21
Frank van der Linden wrote:
>
> The results are at ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/misc/fvdl/bench/
>
> The tests were done using hbench. See the README in that directory,
> and the hbench source code for more info. These are simply
> the 'summary' files.
Thanks for including this in your README file:
The kernel configuration used was GENERIC, but with the DIAGNOSTIC
option removed (it causes some slowdown and interference, and I
plan to remove it from -release kernels on the i386 port anyway).
Also I put sb0 at isa at irq7 instead of irq5, to match reality.
No other changes were made to the config file.
I've been using DIAGNOSTIC on i386/NetBSD since I don't know when.
The kernel comment "# cheap kernel consistency checks" must be
judging some level of cheapness other than size and CPU time B^)
After commenting this option out, my kernels are smaller and a
"make build" is noticeably faster!
I would never have considered turfing this option had you not
mentioned that it had an impact on measuring performance.
Thanks!
-- Ken