Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [tbench regression fixes]: digging out smelly deadmen. | From | Mike Galbraith <> | Date | Sun, 26 Oct 2008 10:15:46 +0100 |
| |
On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 10:00 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 09:46 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > I reproduced this on my Q6600 box. However, I also reproduced it with > > 2.6.22.19. What I think you're seeing is just dbench creating a > > massive train wreck. > > wasn't dbench one of those non-benchmarks that thrives on randomness and > unfairness? > > Andrew said recently: > "dbench is pretty chaotic and it could be that a good change causes > dbench to get worse. That's happened plenty of times in the past." > > So I'm not inclined to worry too much about dbench in any way shape or > form.
Yeah, I was just curious. The switch rate of dbench isn't high enough for math to be an issue, so I wondered how the heck CFS could be such a huge problem for this load. Looks to me like all the math in the _world_ couldn't hurt.. or help.
-Mike
| |