[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090917195909.3a00ef83.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 19:59:09 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"lee.schermerhorn@...com" <lee.schermerhorn@...com>
Subject: Re: aim7 scalability issue on 4 socket machine
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 10:02:19 +0800 "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > Did you see Lee's patch?:
> > >
> > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/9/9/290
> > >
> > > Added Lee and Hugh to CC, retained the below patch for them.
> >
> > Thanks a lot for the CC, Peter.
> > See my reply to that mail for the slightly corrected version.
> >
> > Yes, Yanmin and Lee appear to be fixing exactly the same issue.
> > I haven't thought through Yanmin's version for correctness, but
> > it lacks the vm_start check I added to Lee's, and I do prefer
> > Lee's style - hey, nothing personal!
> >
> > So, Yanmin, please retest with http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/9/13/25
> > and let us know if that works as well for you - thanks.
> I tested Lee's patch and it does fix the issue.
Do we think we should cook up something for -stable?
Either this is a regression or the workload is particularly obscure.
aim7 is sufficiently non-obscure to make me wonder what's happened here?
--
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