Re: [Bug #11308] tbench regression on each kernel release from 2.6.22 -> 2.6.28

Ingo Molnar
2008-11-18T08:45:41Z

* David Miller <davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> From: Eric Dumazet <dada1-fPLkHRcR87vqlBn2x/YWAg@public.gmane.org>
> Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 23:15:50 +0100
>
> > Yes, I mentioned it later. But apparently you dont read my mails,
> > so I will just stop now.
>
> Yeah I was going to mention this too :-/

I spent hours profiling the networking code, and no, i didnt read all
the incoming emails in parallel - i read them after that.

I have established it beyond reasonable doubt that the scheduler is
doing the right thing with the config i've posted. Your "wakeup is two
orders of magnitude more expensive" claim, which got me to measure and
profile this stuff, is not reproducible here and this regression
should not be listed as a scheduler regression.

Ingo