Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 18 Sep 2007 13:00:07 -0400 | From | Chuck Ebbert <> | Subject | Re: CFS: some bad numbers with Java/database threading [FIXED] |
| |
On 09/14/2007 11:32 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Antoine Martin <antoine@nagafix.co.uk> wrote: > >>>> have an impact) Keep CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG=y to be able to twiddle the >>>> sysctl. >> It looks good now! Updated results here: >> http://devloop.org.uk/documentation/database-performance/Linux-Kernels/Kernels-ManyThreads-CombinedTests5-10msYield-noload.png >> http://devloop.org.uk/documentation/database-performance/Linux-Kernels/Kernels-ManyThreads-CombinedTests5-10msYield.png >> Compared with more kernels here - a bit more cluttered: >> http://devloop.org.uk/documentation/database-performance/Linux-Kernels/Kernels-ManyThreads-CombinedTests4-10msYield-noload.png >> >> Thanks Ingo! >> Does this mean that I'll have to keep doing: >> echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/sched_yield_bug_workaround >> Or are you planning on finding a more elegant solution? > > just to make sure - can you get it to work fast with the > -rc6+yield-patch solution too? (i.e. not CFS-devel) We need a (tested) > solution for 2.6.23 and the CFS-devel patches are not for 2.6.23. I've > attached below the latest version of the -rc6 yield patch - the switch > is not dependent on SCHED_DEBUG anymore but always available. >
Is this going to be merged? And will you be making the default == 1 or just leaving it at 0, which forces people who want the older behavior to modify the default?
- 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/
| |