lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 23:09:45 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> To: Martin Bligh <mbligh@...igh.org> Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org> Subject: Re: Performance regression in 2.6.22-git1 (new sched code?) * Martin Bligh <mbligh@...igh.org> wrote: > ~ 1% on 4-way x86_64 > > http://test.kernel.org/perf/kernbench.elm3b6.png > > ~ 4% on 16-way NUMA-Q (i386) > > http://test.kernel.org/perf/kernbench.moe.png > > ~ 1.5% on 4-way i386 > > http://test.kernel.org/perf/kernbench.elm3b132.png thx! I'll check this tomorrow, meanwhile here are a few quick ideas. 1) does reverting this patch improve performance: commit 9c4801cebc2add1fe514bc8eb201b16372eee11a Author: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> Date: Mon Jul 9 18:52:01 2007 +0200 sched: more agressive idle balancing 2) does changing CONFIG_HZ=250 to CONFIG_HZ=100 improve the numbers? CFS has some internal tuning that depends on HZ - a higher HZ is a sign that the user wants more finegrained scheduling. So for maximum server throughput, use CONFIG_HZ=100. 3) could you turn off CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG? The cost is small but perhaps measurable. (these 3 suggestions could be tested together - they should have cumulative effects.) Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists