[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1252824114.16650.130.camel@marge.simson.net>
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2009 08:41:54 +0200
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] sched/core for v2.6.32
On Sun, 2009-09-13 at 00:07 +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Sep 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > It was a statistical property based on performance considerations -
> > and now we flipped it around based on latency and for kbuild
> > performance/throughput reasons: Serge Belyshev reported a 7%
> > increase on a quad due to this change and i measured a 1.5%
> > peak-kbuild performance increase.
> >
> Impressive. I wouldn't have expected that much gain by running the parent
> first. Actually I personally would have expected child-first to perform
> better since (in my experience) it's usually the child that's just forked
> that matters the most.
How can waiting for child1 to run a bit before forking off child2 _not_
hurt? The parent is the worker bee creator, the queen bee if you will.
Seems to me that making the queen wait until one egg hatches and ages a
bit before laying another egg is a very bad plan if the goal is to have
a hive full of short lived worker bees.
-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