Re: kernel performance: 3.16 vs. 4.9

2017-02-05 Thread Matthias Bodenbinder
Am 06.02.2017 um 00:12 schrieb Ben Caradoc-Davies: > On 06/02/17 09:59, Matthias Bodenbinder wrote: >> Am 05.02.2017 um 09:03 schrieb Matthias Bodenbinder: >>> Hi, >>> I have upgraded my PC to newest chipset and CPU: Kaby Lake, Z270 with >>> i7-7700K. >>> Out of curiosity I did a kernel benchmark.

Re: kernel performance: 3.16 vs. 4.9

2017-02-05 Thread Ben Caradoc-Davies
On 06/02/17 09:59, Matthias Bodenbinder wrote: Am 05.02.2017 um 09:03 schrieb Matthias Bodenbinder: Hi, I have upgraded my PC to newest chipset and CPU: Kaby Lake, Z270 with i7-7700K. Out of curiosity I did a kernel benchmark. Comparing darktable performance with kernel 3.16.0-4-amd64 and 4.9.0

Re: kernel performance: 3.16 vs. 4.9

2017-02-05 Thread Matthias Bodenbinder
Am 05.02.2017 um 09:03 schrieb Matthias Bodenbinder: > Hi, > > I have upgraded my PC to newest chipset and CPU: Kaby Lake, Z270 with > i7-7700K. > > Out of curiosity I did a kernel benchmark. Comparing darktable performance > with kernel 3.16.0-4-amd64 and 4.9.0-1-amd64. I use the following com

Re: kernel performance: 3.16 vs. 4.9

2017-02-05 Thread deloptes
Darac Marjal wrote: > If you can understand speech at over a million words per minute, you're > a VERY impressive individual. So you all know the answer :) 1. As I said I would ask in the kernel user list. 2. I would look what test.CR2 does and see what functions ae called, so you can narrow yo

Re: kernel performance: 3.16 vs. 4.9

2017-02-05 Thread Darac Marjal
On 05/02/17 10:22, Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Hi, > >> $ git diff v3.16..v4.9 | wc >>13563424 53139667 428195099 > Would still fit on an audio CD. Just 40 minutes to listen. :o) If you can understand speech at over a million words per minute, you're a VERY impressive individual. > > > Have a

Re: kernel performance: 3.16 vs. 4.9

2017-02-05 Thread Thomas Schmitt
Hi, > $ git diff v3.16..v4.9 | wc >13563424 53139667 428195099 Would still fit on an audio CD. Just 40 minutes to listen. :o) Have a nice day :) Thomas

Re: kernel performance: 3.16 vs. 4.9

2017-02-05 Thread Teemu Likonen
Matthias Bodenbinder [2017-02-05 10:46:23+01] wrote: > Am 05.02.2017 um 09:49 schrieb deloptes: >> have a look at the code changes. > > Looking at the code changes from 3.16 to 4.9 ? > Good idea. I will start right now ;-) Yes. Why not? :-) $ git diff v3.16..v4.9 | wc 13563424 53139667 4

Re: kernel performance: 3.16 vs. 4.9

2017-02-05 Thread Matthias Bodenbinder
Am 05.02.2017 um 09:49 schrieb deloptes: > have a look at the code changes. Looking at the code changes from 3.16 to 4.9 ? Good idea. I will start right now ;-) Matthias

Re: kernel performance: 3.16 vs. 4.9

2017-02-05 Thread deloptes
Matthias Bodenbinder wrote: > Why is that? What am I missing? I can hardly believe that kernel 4.9 is so > much faster. I would say efficient and as such faster. Why not ask the kernel people, or have a look at the code changes. regards

kernel performance: 3.16 vs. 4.9

2017-02-05 Thread Matthias Bodenbinder
Hi, I have upgraded my PC to newest chipset and CPU: Kaby Lake, Z270 with i7-7700K. Out of curiosity I did a kernel benchmark. Comparing darktable performance with kernel 3.16.0-4-amd64 and 4.9.0-1-amd64. I use the following command to run darktable: darktable-cli test.CR2 test.jpg --core -d pe