From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265364AbTLRX53 (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Dec 2003 18:57:29 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265389AbTLRX53 (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Dec 2003 18:57:29 -0500 Received: from e4.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.104]:28133 "EHLO e4.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265364AbTLRX51 (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Dec 2003 18:57:27 -0500 From: Andrew Theurer Reply-To: habanero@us.ibm.com To: Andrea Arcangeli Subject: Re: Wonderful World of Linux 2.6 - Final Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 17:58:55 -0600 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 Cc: Joe Pranevich , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1071724386.2820.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200312180929.46723.habanero@us.ibm.com> <20031218235211.GD10250@dualathlon.random> In-Reply-To: <20031218235211.GD10250@dualathlon.random> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200312181758.55059.habanero@us.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 18 December 2003 17:52, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 09:29:46AM -0600, Andrew Theurer wrote: > > be scheduled optimally, for example, a kernel compile with -j4 on a 4-way > > P4, with and without HT: > > > > average of 10 kernel compiles with -j4 on 2.6.0-test9: > > > > HT disabled: Elapsed: 145.086s User: 513.808s System: 44.724s CPU: 384.5% > > HT enabled: Elapsed: 172.463s User: 633.856s System: 48.003s CPU: 394.8% > > is that 4-way a 4-logical-way or 4-physical-way? If it's a 4-logical > way, this workload is much closer to the best case than the worst case. > I'm guessing a simple -j2 or -j3 should do much worse than that. This is 4-way physical/4-way logical (no HT) vs 4-way physical/8-way logical (with HT)