Re: [Lse-tech] [patch] sched-domain cleanups,sched-2.6.5-rc2-mm2-A3

[Andi Kleen]

On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 10:18:40 +0200
Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> * Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > > ok, could you try min_interval,max_interval and busy_factor all with a
> > > value as 4, in sched.h's SD_NODE_INIT template? (again, only for testing
> > > purposes.)
> > 
> > I kept the old patch and made these changes. The results are much more
> > consistent now 3+x CPU. I still get varyations of ~2GB/s, but I had
> > this with older kernels too.
> 
> great.
> 
> now, could you try the following patch, against vanilla -mm5:
> 
> 	redhat.com/~mingo/scheduler-patches/sched2.patch
> 
> this includes 'context balancing' and doesnt touch the NUMA async
> balancing tunables. Do you get better performance than with stock -mm5?

I get better performance (roughly 2.1x CPU), but only about half the optimum.

-Andi

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/