Re: volanoMark regression with kernel 2.6.26-rc1

[Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 05:22:07PM +0530, Dhaval Giani wrote:
> On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 10:06:30AM +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> > Comparing with 2.6.25, volanoMark has big regression with kernel 2.6.26-rc1.
> > It's about 50% on my 8-core stoakley, 16-core tigerton, and Itanium Montecito.
> > 
> > With bisect, I located below patch.
> > 
> > 18d95a2832c1392a2d63227a7a6d433cb9f2037e is first bad commit
> > commit 18d95a2832c1392a2d63227a7a6d433cb9f2037e
> > Author: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
> > Date:   Sat Apr 19 19:45:00 2008 +0200
> > 
> >     sched: fair-group: SMP-nice for group scheduling
> >     
> >     Implement SMP nice support for the full group hierarchy.
> > 
> > If I reverse the patch with resolving some conflictions, volanoMark result could
> > be restored completely.
> > 
> 
> ok, that's bad. Let's get vatsa and Ingo also involved.
> 

Just to confirm, do you still have a performance regression with
!group_sched?

-- 
regards,
Dhaval