[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47570FE7.6030407@jlab.org>
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2007 15:53:59 -0500
From: Jie Chen <chen@...b.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Simon Holm Th??gersen <odie@...aau.dk>
Subject: Re: Possible bug from kernel 2.6.22 and above
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-11-21 at 15:34 -0500, Jie Chen wrote:
>
>> It is clearly that the synchronization overhead increases as the number
>> of threads increases in the kernel 2.6.21. But the synchronization
>> overhead actually decreases as the number of threads increases in the
>> kernel 2.6.23.8 (We observed the same behavior on kernel 2.6.22 as
>> well). This certainly is not a correct behavior. The kernels are
>> configured with CONFIG_SMP, CONFIG_NUMA, CONFIG_SCHED_MC,
>> CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE, CONFIG_DISCONTIGMEM set. The complete kernel
>> configuration file is in the attachment of this e-mail.
>>
>> From what we have read, there was a new scheduler (CFS) appeared from
>> 2.6.22. We are not sure whether the above behavior is caused by the new
>> scheduler.
>
> If I read this correctly, you say that: .22 is the first bad one right?
>
> The new scheduler (CFS) was introduced in .23, so it seems another
> change would be responsible for this.
>
>
>
Hi, Peter:
Yes. We did observe this in 2.6.22. Thank you.
--
###############################################
Jie Chen
Scientific Computing Group
Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility
12000, Jefferson Ave.
Newport News, VA 23606
(757)269-5046 (office) (757)269-6248 (fax)
chen@...b.org
###############################################
--
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