From: Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@redhat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Context switch times
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 18:53:41 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20011004185340.D18528@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E15pFor-0004sC-00@fenrus.demon.nl> <200110042139.f94Ld5r09675@vindaloo.ras.ucalgary.ca> <20011004.145239.62666846.davem@redhat.com> <20011004175526.C18528@redhat.com> <9piokt$8v9$1@penguin.transmeta.com>
In-Reply-To: <9piokt$8v9$1@penguin.transmeta.com>; from torvalds@transmeta.com on Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 10:42:37PM +0000
On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 10:42:37PM +0000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Could we try to hit just two? Probably, but it doesn't really matter,
> though: to make the lmbench scheduler benchmark go at full speed, you
> want to limit it to _one_ CPU, which is not sensible in real-life
> situations. The amount of concurrency in the context switching
> benchmark is pretty small, and does not make up for bouncing the locks
> etc between CPU's.
I don't quite agree with you that it doesn't matter. A lot of tests
(volanomark, other silly things) show that the current scheduler jumps
processes from CPU to CPU on SMP boxes far too easily, in addition to the
lengthy duration of run queue processing when loaded down. Yes, these
applications are leaving too many runnable processes around, but that's
the way some large app server loads behave. And right now it makes linux
look bad compared to other OSes.
Yes, low latency is good, but jumping around cpus adds more latency in
cache misses across slow busses than is needed when the working set is
already present in the 2MB L2 of your high end server.
-ben
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-10-04 22:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-10-04 21:04 Context switch times Mike Kravetz
2001-10-04 21:14 ` arjan
2001-10-04 21:25 ` David S. Miller
2001-10-04 21:39 ` Richard Gooch
2001-10-04 21:52 ` David S. Miller
2001-10-04 21:55 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2001-10-04 22:35 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-10-04 22:49 ` Mike Kravetz
2001-10-04 22:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-10-04 22:53 ` Benjamin LaHaise [this message]
2001-10-05 15:13 ` Alan Cox
2001-10-05 17:49 ` george anzinger
2001-10-05 22:29 ` Alan Cox
2001-10-05 22:56 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-10-05 23:04 ` Alan Cox
2001-10-05 23:16 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-10-05 23:17 ` Alan Cox
2001-10-05 23:21 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-10-05 23:43 ` Roger Larsson
2001-10-07 1:20 ` george anzinger
2001-10-07 1:33 ` Bill Davidsen
2001-10-07 9:56 ` Alan Cox
2001-10-06 2:24 ` Albert D. Cahalan
2001-10-06 2:57 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-10-07 9:57 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-07 13:03 ` Ingo Oeser
2001-10-07 13:48 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-07 14:24 ` Ingo Oeser
2001-10-07 14:33 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-07 18:00 ` george anzinger
2001-10-07 22:06 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-07 22:31 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-10-07 22:33 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-07 23:49 ` george anzinger
2001-10-08 21:07 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-10-08 22:54 ` discontig physical memory Petko Manolov
2001-10-08 23:05 ` David S. Miller
2001-10-08 23:18 ` Petko Manolov
2001-10-08 23:29 ` David S. Miller
2001-10-09 0:34 ` Petko Manolov
2001-10-09 0:36 ` Petko Manolov
2001-10-09 1:37 ` David S. Miller
2001-10-09 2:43 ` Petko Manolov
2001-10-08 15:19 ` Context switch times bill davidsen
2001-10-10 6:07 ` Mike Fedyk
2001-10-07 18:39 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-10-09 20:37 ` Hubertus Franke
2001-10-09 23:50 ` george anzinger
2001-10-11 10:52 ` Hubertus Franke
2001-10-04 23:41 ` Mike Kravetz
2001-10-04 23:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-10-05 15:15 ` Eric W. Biederman
2001-10-04 23:56 ` Davide Libenzi
2001-10-05 0:45 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-10-05 4:35 ` Mike Kravetz
2001-10-07 17:59 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-10-07 19:54 ` george anzinger
2001-10-07 20:24 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-10-09 4:55 ` Richard Gooch
2001-10-09 5:00 ` David S. Miller
2001-10-09 13:49 ` bill davidsen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-10-05 6:31 Michailidis, Dimitrios
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=20011004185340.D18528@redhat.com \
--to=bcrl@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox