From: J Sloan <jjs@pobox.com>
To: timothy.covell@ashavan.org
Cc: "Stephan von Krawczynski" <skraw@ithnet.com>,
"Davide Libenzi" <davidel@xmailserver.org>,
"Dieter Nützel" <Dieter.Nuetzel@hamburg.de>,
"Robert Love" <rml@tech9.net>,
"Linux Kernel List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Balanced Multi Queue Scheduler ...
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 12:47:05 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3C2F7D49.9040606@pobox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200112292338.AAA29985@webserver.ithnet.com> <200112301951.fBUJoxSr011753@svr3.applink.net>
Timothy Covell wrote:
>Ummm, on my Dual P-III (650MHz with 524988416 Bytes), my current Seti
>efficiency is 5.35 CpF. That's a tad high/slower than an Ultra Sparc IIi
>according to their stats. So, it would appear that being SMP is hurting my
>performance a bit. Unless that is that you meant to run a seti instance for
>each CPU? And this reminds me of how "make -j3 bzlilo" is slower than
>"make -j2 bzlilo".
>
Eh?
On my 4-way ppro, make -j4 is much faster
than a simple "make" for kernel compilation.
Almost linearly so -
This is with recent 2.4.1x kernels BTW on
Red Hat 7.1/7.2
Sorry to hear of your bizzare experiences -
but then again, maybe you're running a
2.2.x kernel or something?
cu
jjs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-12-30 20:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-12-29 5:16 [PATCH] Balanced Multi Queue Scheduler Dieter Nützel
2001-12-29 22:29 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-29 22:49 ` Andrew Morton
2001-12-29 23:39 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-29 23:38 ` Stephan von Krawczynski
2001-12-30 0:02 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-30 2:32 ` Alan Cox
2001-12-30 3:11 ` Dieter Nützel
2001-12-30 19:47 ` Timothy Covell
2001-12-30 20:16 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-30 23:20 ` Stephan von Krawczynski
2001-12-30 23:46 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-31 16:37 ` Stephan von Krawczynski
2001-12-31 17:26 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-30 20:47 ` J Sloan [this message]
2001-12-30 20:53 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-12-30 21:12 ` Alan Cox
2001-12-30 23:16 ` Stephan von Krawczynski
2002-01-14 1:33 ` Bill Davidsen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-12-29 3:53 Davide Libenzi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3C2F7D49.9040606@pobox.com \
--to=jjs@pobox.com \
--cc=Dieter.Nuetzel@hamburg.de \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rml@tech9.net \
--cc=skraw@ithnet.com \
--cc=timothy.covell@ashavan.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.