[fedora-arm] Fedora 17 v6hl First Compose Image

[Gordan Bobic]

On 12/08/2012 08:38 PM, M A Young wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Dec 2012, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
>
>> If you could run a few benchmarks between the v6 and v5 spins we'd all
>> be *very* interested to know the difference in performance. Even
>> simple stuff like time to bzip2 a cached file would be informative.
>
> Here are some very basic benchmark stats
> time bzip2 -9 <initramfs-3.6.9-2.fc17.x86_64.img >/dev/null
> [v6]
> real 1m7.734s
> user 1m7.540s
> sys 0m0.160s
> [v5]
> real 1m10.920s
> user 1m10.650s
> sys 0m0.210s
>
> time md5sum initramfs-3.6.9-2.fc17.x86_64.img >/dev/null
> [v6]
> real 0m0.431s
> user 0m0.290s
> sys 0m0.130s
> [v5]
> real 0m0.433s
> user 0m0.270s
> sys 0m0.150s
>
> time sha256sum initramfs-3.6.9-2.fc17.x86_64.img >/dev/null
> [v6]
> real 0m1.393s
> user 0m1.240s
> sys 0m0.150s
> [v5]
> real 0m1.436s
> user 0m1.350s
> sys 0m0.080s

An earth shattering difference, then.

This is the second time now that it has been demonstrated than having a 
armv6hl distro is a waste of time. Somebody rebuilt Debian for the Pi 
only in that case it was a difference between armel (armv4) and armv6hl, 
and the difference was similarly negligible.

http://www.memetic.org/raspbian-benchmarking-armel-vs-armhf/

The only place where the difference is meaningful in their benchmarks 
was in AV transcoding which isn't a particularly obvious use-case for a 
Pi. The difference between armv5tel (what Fedora soft-float targets) and 
armv6hl is smaller.

Gordan