lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Feb]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: sched domains kernbench improvements


Con Kolivas wrote:

>On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 22:15, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>>Con Kolivas wrote:
>>
>>>Hi Nick
>>>
>>>
>>>>So it is more a matter of tuning than anything fundamental
>>>>
>>>Geez I know how you feel... :-D
>>>
>>>
>>>I tried it on the X440 with sched smt disabled
>>>
>>>better than before but still slower than vanilla on half load; however
>>>better than vanilla on optimal and full load now! I wonder whether the
>>>worse result on half load is as relevant since this is 8x HT cpus?
>>>
>>Thanks. Yep the drop off at half load is to be expected with
>>CONFIG_SCHED_SMT turned off.
>>
>
>Will this affect the SCHED_SMT performance and should I do a round of benchies
>with this enabled?
>
>

It will as far as balancing between physical CPUs, yes. It probably
doesn't make quite a big difference because it is less of a problem
if one sibling goes idle than if one CPU (in the 8-way) goes idle).

But if you could do a round with SCHED_SMT enabled it would be very
nice of you ;)

-
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 14:01    [W:0.151 / U:0.112 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site