From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@myrealbox.com>
To: Paul Jackson <pj@engr.sgi.com>
Cc: kenneth.w.chen@intel.com, torvalds@osdl.org,
nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, akpm@osdl.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] sched: auto-tune migration costs [was: Re: Industry db benchmark result on recent 2.6 kernels]
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 21:25:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4250C19F.9070801@myrealbox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050403043420.212290a8.pj@engr.sgi.com>
Paul Jackson wrote:
> Ok - that flies, or at least walks. It took 53 seconds to
> compute this cost matrix.
Not that I really know what I'm talking about here, but this sounds
highly parallelizable. It seems like you could do N/2 measurements at a
time, so this should be O(N) to compute the matrix (ignoring issues of
how long it takes to write the data to memory, but that should be
insignificant).
Even if you can't parallelize it all the way, it ought to at least help.
--Andy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-04-04 4:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-04-02 1:00 Industry db benchmark result on recent 2.6 kernels Chen, Kenneth W
2005-04-02 2:12 ` Nick Piggin
2005-04-02 14:53 ` [patch] sched: auto-tune migration costs [was: Re: Industry db benchmark result on recent 2.6 kernels] Ingo Molnar
2005-04-02 21:22 ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-03 5:53 ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-03 7:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-03 8:15 ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-03 11:34 ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-03 14:12 ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-03 15:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-03 22:30 ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-05 6:53 ` [patch] sched: auto-tune migration costs Andi Kleen
2005-04-05 7:20 ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-03 15:24 ` [patch] sched: auto-tune migration costs [was: Re: Industry db benchmark result on recent 2.6 kernels] Ingo Molnar
2005-04-03 23:08 ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-04 2:08 ` Nick Piggin
2005-04-04 3:55 ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-04 5:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-04 5:50 ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-04 5:56 ` Nick Piggin
2005-04-04 6:38 ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-04 6:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-04 7:37 ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-04 6:50 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-04 7:27 ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-03 14:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-03 23:15 ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-04 1:31 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-04-04 6:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-04 6:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-06 0:08 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-04-04 4:25 ` Andy Lutomirski [this message]
2005-04-04 4:36 ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-04 1:11 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-04-04 11:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-04 17:27 ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-05 1:43 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-04-05 1:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-05 3:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-06 3:33 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-04-06 6:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-08 2:27 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-04-03 9:01 ` Paul Jackson
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=4250C19F.9070801@myrealbox.com \
--to=luto@myrealbox.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=kenneth.w.chen@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=pj@engr.sgi.com \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.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