From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 3 15:40:22 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arch@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1A7F1065697 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2009 15:40:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.org) Received: from dragon.nuxi.org (trang.nuxi.org [74.95.12.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6E648FC20 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2009 15:40:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.org) Received: from dragon.nuxi.org (obrien@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dragon.nuxi.org (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id n13FeEpR035463; Tue, 3 Feb 2009 07:40:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from obrien@dragon.nuxi.org) Received: (from obrien@localhost) by dragon.nuxi.org (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id n13FeDg1035462; Tue, 3 Feb 2009 07:40:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from obrien) Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 07:40:13 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" To: Poul-Henning Kamp Message-ID: <20090203154013.GA33520@dragon.NUXI.org> Mail-Followup-To: obrien@freebsd.org, Poul-Henning Kamp , "M. Warner Losh" , arch@FreeBSD.org References: <20090202220628.GA76833@dragon.NUXI.org> <9061.1233646810@critter.freebsd.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9061.1233646810@critter.freebsd.dk> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 8.0-CURRENT User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r187132 - head/usr.bin/make X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: obrien@FreeBSD.org List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 15:40:24 -0000 On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 07:40:10AM +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <20090202220628.GA76833@dragon.NUXI.org>, "David O'Brien" writes: > I am disappointed. > You of all people here should know better than making such a mess > out of benchmarks. Poul-Henning, I fully know these results are not stringent. Warner made a baseless 10% performance claim and used it as the bases for a commit. It took rounds of emails to get any detail from him, none of which were the actual times, standard deviation, etc... The only purpose of my measurements were to see if I could reproduce anything close to the claimed 10%. > Second you totally bungle your data collection, by not eliminating > cache-effects. I would have accepted Warner's 10% if I had gotten that just once, regardless if it was due to cache efforts or not. It would have backed up that, without totally cooking the runs, you could see a 10% time difference. -- David