From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266781AbUHDU1q (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Aug 2004 16:27:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267409AbUHDU1q (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Aug 2004 16:27:46 -0400 Received: from mx1.elte.hu ([157.181.1.137]:47527 "EHLO mx1.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266781AbUHDU1p (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Aug 2004 16:27:45 -0400 Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 22:10:19 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: "Martin J. Bligh" Cc: Andrew Morton , kernel@kolivas.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rick Lindsley Subject: Re: 2.6.8-rc2-mm2 performance improvements (scheduler?) Message-ID: <20040804201019.GA25908@elte.hu> References: <20040804122414.4f8649df.akpm@osdl.org> <211490000.1091648060@flay> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <211490000.1091648060@flay> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-ELTE-SpamVersion: MailScanner 4.31.6-itk1 (ELTE 1.2) SpamAssassin 2.63 ClamAV 0.73 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 * Martin J. Bligh wrote: > >> SDET 16 (see disclaimer) > >> Throughput Std. Dev > >> 2.6.7 100.0% 0.3% > >> 2.6.8-rc2 99.5% 0.3% > >> 2.6.8-rc2-mm2 118.5% 0.6% > > > > hum, interesting. Can Con's changes affect the inter-node and inter-cpu > > balancing decisions, or is this all due to caching effects, reduced context > > switching etc? Martin, could you try 2.6.8-rc2-mm2 with staircase-cpu-scheduler unapplied a re-run at least part of your tests? there are a number of NUMA improvements queued up on -mm, and it would be nice to know what effect these cause, and what effect the staircase scheduler has. Ingo