[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH]O18.1int

Guillaume Chazarain wrote:

>28/08/03 14:34:15, Nick Piggin <> wrote:
>>Guillaume Chazarain wrote:
>>>Hi Con (and linux-kernel),
>>>I noticed a regression wrt 2.6.0-test4 and 2.4.22 with this
>>>big context-switcher:
>>Hi Guillaume,
>>If you get the time, would you be able to try my patch? Thanks.
>Here are the results for Nick's v8:
> 639 g 30 0 1336 260 1308 R 51.2 0.1 0:03.80 a.out
> 638 g 22 0 1336 260 1308 S 47.3 0.1 0:03.39 a.out
>User time (seconds): 0.57
>System time (seconds): 2.72
>Elapsed (wall clock) time (h:mm:ss or m:ss): 0:06.85
>Minor (reclaiming a frame) page faults: 17

Thanks Guillaume, so not very good. Its interesting that there can
be such a big difference in performance, but its a very simple app
so makes a good test for the specific regression.

In both Con's and my patches, the reader gets a bit more CPU. This
might be due to it preempting the writer more often on wakeups,
which would lead to more scheduling per work done and a regression.

If this is the case, I'm not sure the behaviour is too undesirable
though: its often very important for woken processes to be run
quickly. Its not clear that this workload is something we would
want to optimize for. Assuming the problem is what I guess.

I will take a look into it further when I get time tomorrow.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:48    [W:0.037 / U:1.764 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site