* Jie Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> the moment you saturate the system a bit more, the numbers should >> improve even with such a ping-pong test. > > You are right. If I manually do load balance (bind unrelated processes > on the other cores), my test code perform as well as it did in the > kernel 2.6.21.
so right now the results dont seem to be too bad to me - the higher overhead comes from two threads running on two different cores and incurring the overhead of cross-core communications. In a true spread-out workloads that synchronize occasionally you'd get the same kind of overhead so in fact this behavior is more informative of the real overhead i guess. In 2.6.21 the two threads would stick on the same core and produce artificially low latency - which would only be true in a real spread-out workload if all tasks ran on the same core. (which is hardly the thing you want on openmp) In any case, if i misinterpreted your numbers or if you just disagree, or if have a workload/test that shows worse performance that it could/should, let me know. Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/