From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263448AbUC3HmS (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Mar 2004 02:42:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263507AbUC3HmS (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Mar 2004 02:42:18 -0500 Received: from mx1.elte.hu ([157.181.1.137]:8126 "EHLO mx1.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263448AbUC3HmN (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Mar 2004 02:42:13 -0500 Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 09:42:32 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Andi Kleen Cc: nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, jun.nakajima@intel.com, ricklind@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, kernel@kolivas.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, anton@samba.org, lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, mbligh@aracnet.com Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] [patch] sched-domain cleanups, sched-2.6.5-rc2-mm2-A3 Message-ID: <20040330074232.GA21596@elte.hu> References: <20040325203032.GA15663@elte.hu> <20040329084531.GB29458@wotan.suse.de> <4068066C.507@yahoo.com.au> <20040329080150.4b8fd8ef.ak@suse.de> <20040329114635.GA30093@elte.hu> <20040329221434.4602e062.ak@suse.de> <4068B692.9020307@yahoo.com.au> <20040330083450.368eafc6.ak@suse.de> <20040330064015.GA19036@elte.hu> <20040330090716.67d2a493.ak@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040330090716.67d2a493.ak@suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-ELTE-SpamVersion: MailScanner 4.26.8-itk2 (ELTE 1.1) SpamAssassin 2.63 ClamAV 0.65 X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-4.9, required 5.9, autolearn=not spam, BAYES_00 -4.90 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamScore: -4 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Andi Kleen wrote: > This works much better, but wildly varying (my tests go from 2.8xCPU > to ~3.8x CPU for 4 CPUs. 2,3 CPU cases are ok). A bit more consistent > results would be better though. i'm resurrecting the balance-on-clone patch i sent a couple of days ago. I found at least one bug in it that might explain why it didnt work back then. (also, the scheduler back then was also too agressive at migrating tasks back.) Stay tuned. Ingo