Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 17 Nov 2008 11:48:33 -0800 (PST) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: [Bug #11308] tbench regression on each kernel release from 2.6.22 -> 2.6.28 |
| |
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> > Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 12:01:19 +0100 > > > The scheduler's overhead barely even registers on a 16-way x86 system > > i'm running tbench on. Here's the NMI profile during 64 threads tbench > > on a 16-way x86 box with an v2.6.28-rc5 kernel [config attached]: > > Try a non-NMI profile. > > It's the whole of the try_to_wake_up() path that's the problem.
David, that makes no sense. A NMI profile is going to be a _lot_ more accurate than a non-NMI one. Asking somebody to do a clearly inferior profile to get "better numbers" is insane.
We've asked _you_ to do NMI profiling, it shouldn't be the other way around.
Linus
| |