RE: [Lmbench-users] Re: pipe performance regression on ia64

From: Staelin, Carl <>
Date: 2005-01-19 20:23:22
One problem is that on SMPs "average" doesn't really
make sense.  Statistically, "average" (mean()) only
really makes sense when you have a Gaussian distribution
of results.  The benchmark results for SMPs tend to
be stongly modal, i.e. very tight clusters around
a few values.  In this environment "average" is
generally meaningless.

That being said, the '-P' flag exists on most lmbench
version 3 benchmarks and allows one to have a given
number of jobs running in parallel.  It is intended
to measure performance under load.  However, even
in this case one may see modal results.  Please see
the recent lmbench paper [2] for an example.



[1] Larry McVoy and Carl Staelin.  lmbench: Portable
    tools for performance analysis.  Proceedings 1996
    USENIX Annual Technical Conference (San Diego, CA),
    pages 279--284.  January 1996.
[2] Carl Staelin.  lmbench --- an extensible micro-
    benchmark suite.  HPL-2004-213.  December 2004.
    Also to appear in Software Practice and Experience.

[(hp)]	Carl Staelin
	Senior Research Scientist
	Hewlett-Packard Laboratories
	Technion City
	Haifa, 32000
	+972(4)823-1237x305	+972(4)822-0407 fax
______ ______

-----Original Message-----
From: Luck, Tony [] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 8:35 AM
To: Zou, Nanhai; Larry McVoy; Linus Torvalds
Cc: Mosberger, David; Staelin, Carl;;; Kernel Mailing List
Subject: RE: [Lmbench-users] Re: pipe performance regression on ia64

>Maybe lmbench could add a feature that bw_pipe will fork CPU number of 
>children to measure the average throughput.
>This will give a much reasonable result when running bw_pipe on a SMP 
>Box, at least for Linux.

bw_pipe (along with most/all of the lmbench tools already has a "-P"
argument to specify the degree of parallelism).


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Received on Wed Jan 19 04:30:25 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:34 EST