public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Martin Knoblauch <knobi@sirius-cafe.de>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: hauan@cmu.edu
Subject: Re: smp cputime issues
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 14:11:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3C33071A.EB4943E8@sirius-cafe.de> (raw)

> smp cputime issues
> 
> 
> hello,
> 
>   we are encountering some weird timing behaviour on our linux cluster.
> 
>   specifically: when running 2 copies of selected programs on a
>   dual-cpu system, the cputime reported for each process is up to 25%
>   higher than when the processes are run on their own. however, if running
>   two different jobs on the same machine, both complete with a cputime
>   equal to when run individually. sample timing output attached.
> 
>   profiling confirms that everything slows down approximately to scale.
>   the results reproduce on a range of different machines (see below).
> 
> additional specifications:
>   - kernel version 2.4.16 (with apic enabled)
>   - chipsets: apollo pro 133, apollo pro 266,
>               intel i860, serverworks LE
>   - all jobs requires less than 1/10 of physical memory
>   - no significant disk i/o takes place
>   - timing with dtime(), /usr/bin/time and shell built-in time
>   - this behavior is NOT seen for all applications. the worst
>     "offender" spends most of its time doing linear algebra.
> 
>   ideas or info-pointers appreciated. more specs available on request.
> 

 two points. First for clarification - do you see the effects also on
elapsed time? Or do you say that the CPU time reporting is screwed?

 Second - you mention that you see the effect mainly on linear algebra
stuff. Could it be that you are memory bandwidth limited if you run two
of them together? Are you using Intel CPUs (my guess) which have the FSB
concept that may make memory bandwidth scaling a problem, or AMD Athlons
which use the Alpha/EV6 bus and should be a bit more friendly.

 Finally, how big is "1/10th of physical" memory? What kind of memory.

Martin
-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------+
|Martin Knoblauch                                     |
|-----------------------------------------------------|
|http://www.knobisoft.de/cats                         |
|-----------------------------------------------------|
|e-mail: knobi@knobisoft.de                           |
+-----------------------------------------------------+

             reply	other threads:[~2002-01-02 13:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-01-02 13:11 Martin Knoblauch [this message]
2002-01-02 15:07 ` smp cputime issues M. Edward Borasky
     [not found] <Pine.GSO.4.33L-022.0201020832230.1894-100000@unix12.andrew.cmu.edu>
2002-01-02 17:46 ` Martin Knoblauch
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-01-02  1:00 Steinar Hauan
2002-01-02  1:31 ` M. Edward Borasky
2002-01-02 13:54   ` Steinar Hauan

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=3C33071A.EB4943E8@sirius-cafe.de \
    --to=knobi@sirius-cafe.de \
    --cc=hauan@cmu.edu \
    --cc=knobi@knobisoft.de \
    --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