![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 08:40:15 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote: > > * Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> wrote: > > > > So both -mm5 and Ingo's sched.patch are much worse than > > > what 2.4 and 2.6 get? > > > > Yes (2.6 vanilla and 2.4-aa at that, i haven't tested 2.4-vanilla) > > > > Ingo's sched.patch makes it a bit better (from 1x CPU to 1.5-1.7xCPU), > > but still much worse than the max of 3.7x-4x CPU bandwidth. > > Andi, could you please try the patch below - this will test whether this > has to do with the rate of balancing between NUMA nodes. The patch > itself is not correct (it way overbalances on NUMA), but it tests the > theory. This works much better, but wildly varying (my tests go from 2.8xCPU to ~3.8x CPU for 4 CPUs. 2,3 CPU cases are ok). A bit more consistent results would be better though. -Andi - 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 14:02 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||