From: Fabio Riccardi <fabio@chromium.com>
To: Mike Kravetz <mkravetz@sequent.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux scheduler limitations?
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 18:58:00 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3AC3F638.FE761EAB@chromium.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0103291326110.26411-100000@dlang.diginsite.com> <3AC3AF3E.F083EE36@chromium.com> <20010329174549.A1264@w-mikek2.sequent.com>
Hi Mike,
somebody else on the list already pointed me at your stuff and I quickly
downloaded your multiqueue patch for 2.4.1 to try it out.
It works great! I finally manage to have 100% CPU utilization and keep the
machine decently responsive.
On a two 1GHz pentium box i went from 1300 specweb to 1600. That's pretty
amazing.
There is a bit more overhead though, I'd say arount 5%, when the CPU is not
fully loaded.
What is the status of your code? Is it going to end-up in the mainstream
kernel?
Do you have a port to the 2.4.2x kernels?
In my enthousiasm I tried to port the patch to 2.4.2-ac26 but I broke
something and it didn't work anymore... :)
I havent't tried the pooling patch yet, it didn't seem to make much sense on a
2-way box. I have an 8-way on which I'm planning to bench my web server
enhancements, I'll try the pooling stuff on it.
BTW: interested in the fastest linux web server?
BTW2: what about the HP scheduler patches?
Thanks, ciao,
- Fabio
Mike Kravetz wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 01:55:11PM -0800, Fabio Riccardi wrote:
> > I'm using 2.4.2-ac26, but I've noticed the same behavior with all the 2.4
> > kernels I've seen so far.
> >
> > I haven't even tried on 2.2
> >
> > - Fabio
>
> Fabio,
>
> Just for fun, you might want to try out some of our scheduler patches
> located at:
>
> http://lse.sourceforge.net/scheduling/
>
> I would be interested in your observations.
>
> --
> Mike Kravetz mkravetz@sequent.com
> IBM Linux Technology Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-03-30 2:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-03-29 21:19 linux scheduler limitations? Fabio Riccardi
2001-03-29 21:26 ` David Lang
2001-03-29 21:55 ` Fabio Riccardi
2001-03-30 1:45 ` Mike Kravetz
2001-03-30 2:58 ` Fabio Riccardi [this message]
2001-03-29 21:35 ` J . A . Magallon
2001-03-29 22:12 ` Fabio Riccardi
2001-03-29 22:33 ` J . A . Magallon
2001-03-29 22:51 ` Fabio Riccardi
2001-03-30 6:52 ` Giuliano Pochini
2001-04-02 22:58 ` Alan Cox
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=3AC3F638.FE761EAB@chromium.com \
--to=fabio@chromium.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mkravetz@sequent.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