"Martin J. Bligh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't think these are doing much for performance. Or at least > *something* in your tree isn't ... > > Kernbench: > Elapsed System User CPU > elm3b67 2.6.11 50.24 146.60 1117.61 2516.67 > elm3b67 2.6.11-mm1 52.27 141.14 1099.91 2374.33 > elm3b67 2.6.11-mm2 51.88 142.41 1104.85 2403.67 > elm3b67 2.6.11-mm4 51.23 145.04 1100.70 2431.00 > > (elm3b67 is a 16x x440 ia32 NUMA system + HT)
Sounds like the CPU scheduler, yes > Is there an easy way to just test those sched changes alone? Nick has tossed out and redone all the scheduler patches from -mm4, but I assume it's all pretty much the same. At http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/stuff/mbligh.gz is a rollup (against 2.6.12-rc1) of sched2-fix-schedstats-warning.patch sched2-cleanup-wake_idle.patch sched2-improve-load-balancing-pinned-tasks.patch sched2-reduce-active-load-balancing.patch sched2-fix-smt-scheduling-problems.patch sched2-add-debugging.patch sched2-less-aggressive-idle-balancing.patch sched2-balance-timers.patch sched2-tweak-affine-wakeups.patch sched2-no-aggressive-idle-balancing.patch sched2-balance-on-fork.patch sched2-schedstats-update-for-balance-on-fork.patch sched2-sched-tuning.patch sched2-sched-domain-sysctl.patch add-do_proc_doulonglongvec_minmax-to-sysctl-functions.patch - 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/
