Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 28 Oct 2002 16:00:19 -0800 | From | "Martin J. Bligh" <> | Subject | Re: NUMA scheduler (was: 2.5 merge candidate list 1.5) |
| |
>> I didn't modify what you sent me at all ... perhaps my machine is >> just faster than yours? >> >> /me ducks & runs ;-) > > :-))) > > I tried with IA32, too ;-) With PROBLEMSIZE=1000000 I get on a 2.8GHz > XEON something around 16s. On a 1.6GHz Athlon it's 22s. Both times running > ./numa_test 2 on a dual CPU box. The usertime is pretty independent of the > OS, (but the scheduling influences it a lot).
I have 700MHz P3 Xeons, but I have 2Mb L2 cache on them which is much better than the newer chips. That might make a big differernce.
> But: you have a node level cache! Maybe the whole memory is inside that > one and then things can go really fast. Hmmm, I guess I'll need some > cache detection in the future to enforce that the BM really runs in > memory... Increasing PROBLEMSIZE might help, but we can do that later, > when testing affinity (I'm not giving up on this idea... ;-)
Yup, 32Mb cache. Not sure if it's faster than local memory or not.
M.
- 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/
| |