| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1196889302.6353.29.camel@lappy> Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2007 22:15:02 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> To: Holger.Wolf@...ibm.com Cc: mingo@...e.hu, schwidefsky@...ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Scheduler behaviour On Wed, 2007-12-05 at 21:15 +0100, Holger Wolf wrote: > We discovered performance degradation with dbench when using kernel 2.6.23 compared to kernel 2.6.22. We've fixed a lot of regressions and made a lot of other changes to the scheduler since .23. Could you please try the backport of the latest scheduler on top of .23 to see if any of our recent work solved your problem? (using a backport against .23 or even .22 allows you to test just the scheduler changes in isolation) http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/sched-cfs-v2.6.22.13-v24.patch http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/sched-cfs-v2.6.23.9-v24.patch Also, it could be dbench is one of those benchmarks that favours unfairness, I seem to remember so.. still we should not regress too much without a very good reason. -- 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