From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932465AbWLNKzF (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Dec 2006 05:55:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932488AbWLNKzF (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Dec 2006 05:55:05 -0500 Received: from outpipe-village-512-1.bc.nu ([81.2.110.250]:46085 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932465AbWLNKzE convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Dec 2006 05:55:04 -0500 Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:03:24 +0000 From: Alan To: Bob Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Need to enable caches in SMP ? (was Kernel 2.6 SMP very slow with ServerWorks LE Chipset) Message-ID: <20061214110324.780b4bf0@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <4580C054.2080902@homeurl.co.uk> References: <4577AA11.6020906@homeurl.co.uk> <4580C054.2080902@homeurl.co.uk> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.8.20; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > As per Alan's suggestion I decompressed the kernel source tree with the > processes pegged to one CPU then the other, and as he predicted it took > vastly longer on one CPU than the other, but I don't know what that > implies, or how to fix it. >>From the timing it sounds like one processor cache is disabled which is a little peculiar to say the least. Alan