From: Andrew Morton <akpm@zip.com.au>
To: "DICKENS,CARY (HP-Loveland,ex2)" <cary_dickens2@hp.com>
Cc: "Kernel Mailing List (E-mail)" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"HABBINGA,ERIK (HP-Loveland,ex1)" <erik_habbinga@hp.com>
Subject: Re: Kernel performance in reference to 2.4.5pre1
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 11:33:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3BCF207F.DF01BBB8@zip.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <C5C45572D968D411A1B500D0B74FF4A80418D57B@xfc01.fc.hp.com>
"DICKENS,CARY (HP-Loveland,ex2)" wrote:
>
> 2.4.5pre1 is the base for comparison,
>
> [ figures showing that more recent kernels suck ]
>
SFS is a rather specialised workload, and synchronous NFS exports
are not a thing which gets a lot of attention. It could be one
small, hitherto unnoticed change which caused this performance
regression. And it appears that the change occurred between 2.4.5
and 2.4.7.
We don't know whether this slowdown is caused by changes in the VM,
the filesystem, the block device layer, nfsd or networking. For example,
ksoftirqd was introduced between 2.4.5 and 2.4.7. Could it be that?
For all these reasons it would be really helpful if you could
go back and test the 2.4.6-preX and 2.4.7-preX kernels (binary search)
and tell us if there was a particular release which caused this decrease in
throughput.
If it can be pinned down to a particular patch then there's a good
chance that it can be fixed.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-10-18 18:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-10-18 16:38 Kernel performance in reference to 2.4.5pre1 DICKENS,CARY (HP-Loveland,ex2)
2001-10-18 18:33 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-10-18 19:38 DICKENS,CARY (HP-Loveland,ex2)
2001-10-18 20:17 ` Andreas Dilger
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=3BCF207F.DF01BBB8@zip.com.au \
--to=akpm@zip.com.au \
--cc=cary_dickens2@hp.com \
--cc=erik_habbinga@hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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