* Kernel Benchmarks With P4+SMP+SMT?
@ 2004-12-29 0:17 Justin Piszcz
2004-12-30 3:08 ` Bill Davidsen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Justin Piszcz @ 2004-12-29 0:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Has anyone performed any benchmarks with:
No SMP w/HT?
SMP w/HT?
SMP + SMT w/HT?
[ ] Symmetric multi-processing support
[ ] SMT (Hyperthreading) scheduler support
x SMT scheduler support improves the CPU scheduler's decision making
x when dealing with Intel Pentium 4 chips with HyperThreading at a
x cost of slightly increased overhead in some places. If unsure say
x N here.
I'm tempted to try SMT and benchmark these sometime but I am asking the
list if anyone has already done this first.
Question: "slightly increased overhead in some places."
What type of workloads would exhibit such overhead?
Would this option (SMT) be recommended for a desktop or server machine?
Are there any white papers or documentation I can read about this option?
Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: Kernel Benchmarks With P4+SMP+SMT?
2004-12-29 0:17 Kernel Benchmarks With P4+SMP+SMT? Justin Piszcz
@ 2004-12-30 3:08 ` Bill Davidsen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Bill Davidsen @ 2004-12-30 3:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Justin Piszcz; +Cc: linux-kernel
Justin Piszcz wrote:
> Has anyone performed any benchmarks with:
>
> No SMP w/HT?
> SMP w/HT?
> SMP + SMT w/HT?
>
> [ ] Symmetric multi-processing support
> [ ] SMT (Hyperthreading) scheduler support
>
> x SMT scheduler support improves the CPU scheduler's decision making
> x when dealing with Intel Pentium 4 chips with HyperThreading at a
> x cost of slightly increased overhead in some places. If unsure say
> x N here.
>
> I'm tempted to try SMT and benchmark these sometime but I am asking the
> list if anyone has already done this first.
>
> Question: "slightly increased overhead in some places."
>
> What type of workloads would exhibit such overhead?
>
> Would this option (SMT) be recommended for a desktop or server machine?
>
> Are there any white papers or documentation I can read about this option?
I run SMT on all my HT uni systems. Depending on what you do it can help
up to 30% (kernel build) or just enough to measure. This is one of those
"it depends" things, I bet there are loads which run better without, and
there is a tad of overhead in the SMP kernel locking.
If you run SMP, you have that overhead anyway, so I doubt it hurts.
YMMV
--
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
CTO TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-12-30 2:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-12-29 0:17 Kernel Benchmarks With P4+SMP+SMT? Justin Piszcz
2004-12-30 3:08 ` Bill Davidsen
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox