From: Alex Chiang <achiang@hp.com>
To: Luca Zini <luca.zini@gmail.com>
Cc: aagaande@gmail.com, rdelcueto@hotmail.com, efault@gmx.de,
mingo@elte.hu, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: scheduler vs hardware? (was Re: another i7 (linux) bug?)
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 14:54:38 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100121215438.GK17684@ldl.fc.hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201001211258.23499.luca.zini@gmail.com>
Scheduler folks cc'ed.
* Luca Zini <luca.zini@gmail.com>:
> Dear all,
> I find your addresses in the thread
> (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15064) that I followed.
In general, it's better to send mail to the mailing lists in case
individual developers don't have time/expertise to help you.
Which kernel are you using?
This may be an issue for the scheduler folks since in your
experiment, the only thing you're changing are the nice levels,
not hardware.
> I had the same problem that now seems to be solved. There is
> also another peculiarity in my system:
>
> if I run a cpu intensive process with the lowest priority (19
> from man nice) I obtain much better performance that with the
> highest priority available (-20 from man nice).
>
> For example the same file is processed by lame in 8.7 seconds
> at the lowest priority, and in 12 seconds at the highest
> priority. Before posting a bug I wold like to understand if
> this is a problem related to the i7 mobile (my processor is a
> i7 Q720).
>
> As far as I tested on the same laptop series (dell studio 15),
> with the same kernel this problem does not exists.
>
> Can you test your i7 mobile system to help me to understand if
> it is related to the processor?
>
> Regards, Luca Zini
>
next parent reply other threads:[~2010-01-21 21:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <201001211258.23499.luca.zini@gmail.com>
2010-01-21 21:54 ` Alex Chiang [this message]
2010-01-22 7:19 ` scheduler vs hardware? (was Re: another i7 (linux) bug?) Mike Galbraith
2010-01-22 8:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-01-22 9:10 ` Mike Galbraith
2010-01-22 9:25 ` Mike Galbraith
2010-01-22 9:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-01-22 11:22 ` Luca Zini
2010-01-22 15:58 ` Chris Friesen
2010-01-23 9:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-01-22 20:15 ` Luca Zini
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=20100121215438.GK17684@ldl.fc.hp.com \
--to=achiang@hp.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=aagaande@gmail.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luca.zini@gmail.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rdelcueto@hotmail.com \
/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