![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 05:51:45AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > the smp_processor_id()/(HZ*num_cpus) 'interleaving' of every APIC clock > was an SMP scalability issue, and it was done as part of the smptimers > patch. It just got into the kernel much earlier. > > but these days, with the removal of BHs, it might be less of a factor, > mainly because timers have no global synchronization anymore, so we can > again try to not interleave the APIC clocks. Only testing will tell, > because there might be some interaction between timer-generated code > still. > > Dipankar, wli, would it be possible to try the attached simple patch with > some of the more complex networking loads? The patch gets rid of the APIC > timer interleaving. > Ingo, Removal of interleaving of apic timers doesn't seem to have any adverse affect. Here are some numbers from a 16-CPU NUMA-Q with tbench (32 clients) averaged over 5 runs - 2.5.40-vanilla - 44.16 MB/Sec 2.5.40-no-clock-interleave - 44.17 MB/Sec Thanks -- Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com> http://lse.sourceforge.net Linux Technology Center, IBM Software Lab, Bangalore, India. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:29 [W:0.432 / U:0.060 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||||