[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0811171030180.3468@nehalem.linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 10:33:19 -0800 (PST)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
cc: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, rjw@...k.pl,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org,
cl@...ux-foundation.org, efault@....de, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
Subject: Re: [Bug #11308] tbench regression on each kernel release from 2.6.22
-> 2.6.28
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> hm, i'm not sure whether i can post benchmarks from the Nehalem box -
> but i can confirm it in general terms that it's rather nice ;-)
Intel released the NDA from various web sites a week or two ago, and Intel
is now selling it in the US (I think today was in fact the official
launch), so I think benchmarks are safe - you can buy the dang things on
the street.
I don't know what availability is, of course. But I doubt that Intel would
mind Nehalem benchmarks even if it were a paper launch - at least from my
personal experience, I've not seen any bad behavior (and plenty of good).
> This was run on another testbox (4x4 Barcelona) that rocks similarly
> well in terms of memory subsystem latencies: which seems to be
> tbench's main current critical path.
Ahh, ok.
Linus
--
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