Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: 2.6.19-rc5: known regressions | From | Tim Chen <> | Date | Wed, 08 Nov 2006 15:11:34 -0800 |
| |
On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 17:22 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> There's perhaps one thing that might help us to see whether it's just a > benchmark effekt or a real problem: > > With Tim's CONFIG_NR_CPUS=8, NR_IRQS only increases from 224 in 2.6.18 > to 512 in 2.6.19-rc. > > With CONFIG_NR_CPUS=255, NR_IRQS increases from 224 in 2.6.18 > to 8416 in 2.6.19-rc. > > @Tim: > Can you try CONFIG_NR_CPUS=255 with both 2.6.18 and 2.6.19-rc5? >
With CONFIG_NR_CPUS increased from 8 to 64: 2.6.18 see no change in fork time measured. 2.6.19-rc5 see a 138% increase in fork time.
When I increase CONFIG_NR_CPUS to 128, the child process from fork got killed when it executes sched_getaffinity call in the routine to pin the process onto a processor. This happened for both 2.6.18 and 2.6.19-rc5. I'll need to check more carefully what lmbench is doing there.
Tim - 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/
| |