[<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