lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Jan]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Interesting analysis of linux kernel threading by IBM
Date
From
Peter Rival <frival@zk3.dec.com> said:

[...]

> That's easy enough I should think (he says, never having run 99). My
> question now is, if we should uncover something that appears to be a
> problem in the kernel, will people listen if the testcase that found it
> was SPECweb99, or will we wind up down the same rathole we've been down
> recently? I'm hoping we can find something that people won't say "eww -
> a benchmark, how stupid", point out its flaws, and then ignore whate ver
> merit it may have. In other words, I don't want to waste everyone's
> time.

I'd say they will listen if you are able to make a convincing case that
this is a real problem. The problem with scheduler patch and the threading
benchmark is that it optimizes performance under completely impossible
conditions, breaking real world performance. The (in)famous Mindcraft
benchmarks were also shot down, but the real problems uncovered were
considered carefully.
--
Horst von Brand vonbrand@sleipnir.valparaiso.cl
Casilla 9G, Viña del Mar, Chile +56 32 672616


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:56    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans