[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080327123213.GC21894@elte.hu>
Date:	Thu, 27 Mar 2008 13:32:13 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, npiggin@...e.de, paulus@...ba.org,
	tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, tony.luck@...el.com,
	Alan.Brunelle@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Generic smp_call_function(), improvements, and
	smp_call_function_single()
* Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com> wrote:
> > i'd love to be able to run/pull something simple that enables me to 
> > replicate the measurements you did on a generic PC [without having 
> > to hit any real IO hardware which would put any context switching 
> > effects down into the noise category].
> 
> You can pull io-cpu-affinity or io-cpu-affinity-kthread from 
> git://git.kernel.dk/linux-2.6-block.git - or just see the two attached 
> patches, apply either one to current -git to test it.
another stupid question: what should i run in user-space to replicate 
your "3 usecs versus 2 usecs" result? io-affinity-ipi.patch seems to 
have no self-benchmarking capability at first sight. (I'd rather not try 
and cook up anything myself - i'd like to reproduce the workload you 
think is relevant for your IO affinity purposes.) Best would be to have 
a Kconfig based self-test that just runs during bootup if i boot a 
bzImage. (laziness rules - and this way i could also track performance 
regressions more easily, by looking at historic serial logs.)
	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
 
