lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Mar]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateTue, 30 Mar 2004 17:14:32 +1000
FromNick Piggin <>
SubjectRe: [Lse-tech] [patch] sched-domain cleanups, sched-2.6.5-rc2-mm2-A3
Andi Kleen wrote:
> 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.
> 

Oh good, thanks Ingo. Andi you probably want to lower your minimum
balance time too then, and maybe try with an even lower maximum.
Maybe reduce cache_hot_time a bit too.
-
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 13:02    [W:0.218 / U:0.030 seconds]
©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans