Re: [CFT][RFC] HT scheduler

Nick Piggin
2003-12-11T08:14:54Z

Rhino wrote:

>On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 18:24:20 +1100
>Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Nick Piggin wrote:
>>
>>
>>>http://www.kerneltrap.org/~npiggin/w26/
>>>Against 2.6.0-test11
>>>
>>
>>Oh, this patchset also (mostly) cures my pet hate for the
>>last few months: VolanoMark on the NUMA.
>>
>>http://www.kerneltrap.org/~npiggin/w26/vmark.html
>>
>>The "average" plot for w26 I think is a little misleading because
>>it got an unlucky result on the second last point making it look
>>like its has a downward curve. It is usually more linear with a
>>sharp downward spike at 150 rooms like the "maximum" plot.
>>
>>Don't ask me why it runs out of steam at 150 rooms. hackbench does
>>something similar. I think it might be due to some resource running
>>short, or a scalability problem somewhere else.
>>
>
>i didn't had the time to apply the patches (w26 and C1 from ingo )
>on a vanilla t11, but i merged them with the wli-2,btw this one has really put
>my box on steroids ;) .
>

You won't be able to merge mine with Ingo's. Which one put the box on
steroids? :)

>
>none of them finished a hackbench 320 run, the OOM killed all of my
>agetty's logging me out. the box is a 1way p4(HT) 1gb of ram
>and no swap heh.
>
>
> hackbench:
>
> sched-rollup-w26 sched-SMT-2.6.0-test11-C1
>
> 50 4.839 50 5.200
> 100 9.415 100 10.090
> 150 14.469 150 14.764
>
>
>
> time tar -xvjpf linux-2.6.0-test11.tar.bz2:
>
> sched-rollup-w26 sched-SMT-2.6.0-test11-C1
>
> real 43.396 real 23.136
>
^^^^^^

>
> user 27.608 user 20.700
> sys 4.039 sys 4.344
>

Wonder whats going on here? Is this my patch vs Ingo's with nothing else
applied?
How does plain 2.6.0-test11 go?

Thanks for testing.