Re: [PATCH 2.5.53] NUMA scheduler (1/3)

["Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>]

>> > Kernbench:
>> >                         Elapsed       User     System        CPU
>> >              sched50     29.96s   288.308s    83.606s    1240.8%
>> >              sched52    29.836s   285.832s    84.464s    1240.4%
>> >              sched53    29.364s   284.808s    83.174s    1252.6%
>> >              stock50    31.074s   303.664s    89.194s    1264.2%
>> >              stock53    31.204s   306.224s    87.776s    1263.2%
>>
>> Not sure what you're correllating here because your rows are all named
>> the same thing. However, the new version seems to be much slower
>> on systime (about 7-8% for me), which roughly correllates with your
>> last two rows above. Me no like.
>
> Sorry, I forgot to include a bit better description of what the
> row labels mean.
>
> sched50 = linux 2.5.50 with the NUMA scheduler
> sched52 = linux 2.5.52 with the NUMA scheduler
> sched53 = linux 2.5.53 with the NUMA scheduler
> stock50 = linux 2.5.50 without the NUMA scheduler
> stock53 = linux 2.5.53 without the NUMA scheduler
>
> Thus, this shows that the NUMA scheduler drops systime by ~5.5 secs,
> or roughly 8%.  So, my testing is not showing an increase in systime
> like you apparently are seeing.

Sorry, the row names weren't that bad if I actually read them carefully ;-)

I was doing a slightly different test - Erich's old sched code vs the new
both on 2.5.54, and seem to have a degredation.

M.