Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 12 Jun 1999 01:53:05 +0200 (CEST) | From | Davide Libenzi <> | Subject | Re: More new schedule() results ... |
| |
>> N.Threads 2.3.5 MyPatch Diff >> >> 2 700000 600000 -15 % >> 10 280000 365000 +25 % >> 450 6100 8900 +45 %
>this is what i suspected. If we are switching 450 threads that also do >some real work then we are trashing the cache _badly_ already, so pure >scheduling costs will not matter at all. Most systems (even loaded >servers) have typically less than 5 runnable processes. So those systems >will see 15% scheduling slowdown. Some applications might use many threads >- for those cases your patch is a nice improvement.
Sorry, but are we building a new version of MS-DOS here ???
Linux is well known as good server platform and You want to say me that more of Linux users will fall the 2 thread case ??!?!
In a schedule() algo filled of gotos to get a better prefetch queue that can improve speed no more then 10 % I post a patch that on tipical Linux machines will lead to a 30 up to 80 % of increasing performance.
Now one of the two things must be true:
1) I'm crazy 2) I'm in the wrong place
Let me know.
Cheers, Davide.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |