[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1202564259.4035.18.camel@homer.simson.net>
Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2008 14:37:39 +0100
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc: Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: Scheduler(?) regression from 2.6.22 to 2.6.24 for short-lived
threads
On Sat, 2008-02-09 at 12:40 +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 09, 2008 at 11:58:25AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 2008-02-09 at 09:03 +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> >
> > > How many CPUs do you have ?
> >
> > It's a P4/HT, so 1 plus $CHUMP_CHANGE_MAYBE
> >
> > > > 2.6.25-smp (git today)
> > > > time 29 ms
> > > > time 61 ms
> > > > time 72 ms
> > >
> > > These ones look rather strange. What type of workload is it ? Can you
> > > publish the program for others to test it ?
> >
> > It's the proglet posted in this thread.
>
> OK sorry, I did not notice it when I first read the report.
Hm. The 2.6.25-smp kernel is the only one that looks like it's doing
what proggy wants to do, massive context switching. Bump threads to
larger number so you can watch: the supposedly good kernel (22) is doing
everything on one CPU. Everybody else sucks differently (idleness), and
the clear throughput winner, via mad over-schedule (!?!), is git today.
-Mike
--
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