From: Andy Isaacson <adi@hexapodia.org>
To: max@vortex.physik.uni-konstanz.de
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.0-test4 shocking (HT) benchmarking (wrong logic./phys. HT CPU distinction?)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 13:50:51 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030826135051.A16285@hexapodia.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200308261552.44541.max@vortex.physik.uni-konstanz.de>; from max@vortex.physik.uni-konstanz.de on Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 03:52:44PM +0200
On Tue, Aug 26, 2003, max@vortex.physik.uni-konstanz.de wrote:
> in our fine physics group we recently bought a DUAL XEON P4 2666MHz, 2GB, with
> hyper-threading support and I had the honour of making the thing work. In the
> process I also did some benchmarking using two different kernels (stock
> SuSE-8.2-Pro 2.4.20-64GB-SMP, and the latest and greatest vanilla
> 2.6.0-test4). I benchmarked
>
> [2] running time of a multi-threaded numerical simulation making extensive use
> of FFTs, using the fftw.org library.
One thing to watch out for, with fftw: I believe it will benchmark
various kernels, and decide which one to use, at run-time. If the
scheduler fools it into thinking that a particular kernel is going to
perform better, it might do the wrong thing.
Does fftw have a switch to write a debug log?
("kernel" in this context means "the small section of code used to solve
the fft", not "the OS code running in privileged mode".)
-andy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-08-26 18:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-08-26 13:52 2.6.0-test4 shocking (HT) benchmarking (wrong logic./phys. HT CPU distinction?) max
2003-08-26 16:36 ` Stan Bubrouski
2003-08-26 18:50 ` Andy Isaacson [this message]
2003-08-26 19:12 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-08-27 13:40 ` Andrew Theurer
2003-08-26 19:20 ` bill davidsen
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=20030826135051.A16285@hexapodia.org \
--to=adi@hexapodia.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=max@vortex.physik.uni-konstanz.de \
/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