From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932551Ab1JaJkF (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Oct 2011 05:40:05 -0400 Received: from smtprelay0212.b.hostedemail.com ([64.98.42.212]:60160 "EHLO smtprelay.b.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932359Ab1JaJkD (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Oct 2011 05:40:03 -0400 X-Panda: scanned! X-Spam-Summary: 2,-1.05263,0,7c8438a5d6fc5942,d41d8cd98f00b204,t.artem@lycos.com,hmh@hmh.eng.br:linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,RULES_HIT:152:355:379:541:582:599:601:945:973:988:989:1152:1260:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1540:1593:1594:1676:1711:1730:1747:1766:1792:2393:2553:2559:2562:2691:2692:3027:3138:3352:3865:3867:3868:3869:3870:3871:3873:3874:4250:5007:6261:7688:7901:7903:10004:10016:10400:11658:11914,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:fn,MSBL:none,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0 X-Session-Marker: 742E617274656D406C79636F732E636F6D X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1843 Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 09:40:01 +0000 (GMT) From: "Artem S. Tashkinov" To: hmh@hmh.eng.br Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <574299906.69412.1320054001912.JavaMail.mail@webmail05> References: <269467866.49093.1320004632156.JavaMail.mail@webmail17> <20111030212644.GA7106@khazad-dum.debian.net> <815860869.50724.1320011477430.JavaMail.mail@webmail17> <20111031091607.GB7106@khazad-dum.debian.net> Subject: Re: Re: HT (Hyper Threading) aware process scheduling doesn't work as it should MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Webmail X-Originating-IP: [46.146.125.4] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > On Oct 31, 2011, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > > On Sun, 30 Oct 2011, Artem S. Tashkinov wrote: > > > Please make sure both are set to 0. If they were not 0 at the time you > > > ran your tests, please retest and report back. > > > > That's 0 & 0 for me. > > How idle is your system during the test? load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 As I've mentioned great many times I run this test on a completely idle system (i.e. I even `init 3` in advance to avoid any unexpected CPU usage spikes caused by unrelated processed). I have to insist that people conduct this test on their own without trusting my words. Probably there's something I overlook or don't fully understand but from what I see, there's a serious issue here (at least Microsoft XP and 7 work exactly the way I believe an OS should handle such a load). Artem