All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Prakash K. Cheemplavam" <prakashkc@gmx.de>
To: unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input)
Cc: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>,
	linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Scheduler fairness problem on 2.6 series
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 21:22:25 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <411A71F1.3090504@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <411A0B71.4030503@gmx.de>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

|
| I don't think it is the overhead. I rather think the way the kernel
| schedulers gives mpich and the cpu bound program  resources is unfair.

Well, I don't know whether it helps, but I ran a profiler and these are
the functions which cause so much wasted CPU cycles when running 16
processes of my example with mpich:

124910    9.8170  vmlinux                  tcp_poll
123356    9.6949  vmlinux                  sys_select
85634     6.7302  vmlinux                  do_select
71858     5.6475  vmlinux                  sysenter_past_esp
62093     4.8801  vmlinux                  kfree
51658     4.0600  vmlinux                  __copy_to_user_ll
37495     2.9468  vmlinux                  max_select_fd
36949     2.9039  vmlinux                  __kmalloc
22700     1.7841  vmlinux                  __copy_from_user_ll
14587     1.1464  vmlinux                  do_gettimeofday

Is anything scheduler related?

bye,

Prakash
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFBGnHxxU2n/+9+t5gRAlF+AJ9z+OqbIJYkeiy4nAPVB22S/WLLnACg1khF
XeF+3Hq0adpoLjdbn+tmzn0=
=7Onu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  reply	other threads:[~2004-08-11 19:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20040811010116.GL11200@holomorphy.com>
2004-08-11  2:21 ` Scheduler fairness problem on 2.6 series (Attn: Nick Piggin and others) spaminos-ker
2004-08-11  2:23   ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-08-11  2:45     ` Peter Williams
2004-08-11  2:47       ` Peter Williams
2004-08-11  3:23         ` Peter Williams
2004-08-11  3:31           ` Con Kolivas
2004-08-11  3:46             ` Peter Williams
2004-08-11  3:44           ` Peter Williams
2004-08-13  0:13             ` spaminos-ker
2004-08-13  1:44               ` Peter Williams
2004-08-11  3:09   ` Con Kolivas
2004-08-11 10:24     ` Prakash K. Cheemplavam
2004-08-11 11:26       ` Scheduler fairness problem on 2.6 series Con Kolivas
2004-08-11 12:05         ` Prakash K. Cheemplavam
2004-08-11 19:22           ` Prakash K. Cheemplavam [this message]
2004-08-11 23:42             ` Con Kolivas
2004-08-12  8:08               ` Prakash K. Cheemplavam
2004-08-12 18:18               ` Bill Davidsen
2004-08-12  2:04     ` Scheduler fairness problem on 2.6 series (Attn: Nick Piggin and others) spaminos-ker
2004-08-12  2:24     ` spaminos-ker
2004-08-12  2:53       ` Con Kolivas

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=411A71F1.3090504@gmx.de \
    --to=prakashkc@gmx.de \
    --cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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.