Re: 2.6.12-rc6-mm1

["Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@mbligh.org>]

--Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org> wrote (on Saturday, June 11, 2005 15:22:30 +1000):

> On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 14:14, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
>> --"Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@mbligh.org> wrote (on Friday, June 10, 2005 > > 
> OK, I backed out those 4, and the degredation mostly went away.
>> > See
>> > http://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/mbligh/abat/perf/kernbench.
>> > moe.png
>> > 
>> > and more specifically, see the +p5150 near the right hand side.
>> > I don't think it's quite as good as mainline, but much closer.
>> > I did this run with HZ=1000, and the the one with no scheduler
>> > patches at all with HZ=250, so I'll try to do a run that's more
>> > directly comparable as well
>> 
>> OK, that makes it look much more like mainline. Looks like you were still
>> revising the details of your patch Con ... once you're ready, drop me a
>> URL for it, and I'll make the system whack on that too.
> 
> Great thanks. Here are rolled up all the reconsidered changes that apply 
> directly to 2.6.12-rc6-mm1 -purely for testing purposes-. I'd be very 
> grateful to see how this performed; it has been boot and stress tested at 
> this end. If it shows detriment I'll have to make the smp nice changes more 
> complex.

It's much better ... but still a degredation - see point p5181 on:

http://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/mbligh/abat/perf/kernbench.moe.png

Only really seems to hurt the NUMA box (the x440 one ... elm3b67 ... is 
still trying to find it's ass with both hands). I'm not necessarily saying
it's a problem ... not sure what the benefits of the patch are, but it's a 
data point, at least ?

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/