Re: [PATCH 12/13] schedstats additions for sched-balance-fork

2005-02-25 Thread Nick Piggin
Rick Lindsley wrote: There is little help we get from userspace, and i'm not sure we want to add scheduler overhead for this single benchmark - when something like a _tiny_ bit of NUMAlib use within the OpenMP library would probably solve things equally well! There's has been a

Re: [PATCH 12/13] schedstats additions for sched-balance-fork

2005-02-25 Thread Rick Lindsley
There is little help we get from userspace, and i'm not sure we want to add scheduler overhead for this single benchmark - when something like a _tiny_ bit of NUMAlib use within the OpenMP library would probably solve things equally well! There's has been a general problem with

Re: [PATCH 12/13] schedstats additions for sched-balance-fork

2005-02-25 Thread Rick Lindsley
There is little help we get from userspace, and i'm not sure we want to add scheduler overhead for this single benchmark - when something like a _tiny_ bit of NUMAlib use within the OpenMP library would probably solve things equally well! There's has been a general problem with

Re: [PATCH 12/13] schedstats additions for sched-balance-fork

2005-02-25 Thread Nick Piggin
Rick Lindsley wrote: There is little help we get from userspace, and i'm not sure we want to add scheduler overhead for this single benchmark - when something like a _tiny_ bit of NUMAlib use within the OpenMP library would probably solve things equally well! There's has been a

Re: [PATCH 12/13] schedstats additions for sched-balance-fork

2005-02-24 Thread Nick Piggin
Ingo Molnar wrote: * Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [PATCH 11/13] sched-domains aware balance-on-fork [PATCH 12/13] schedstats additions for sched-balance-fork [PATCH 13/13] basic tuning STREAMS numbers tricky. It's pretty much the only benchmark that 1) relies on being able to al

Re: [PATCH 12/13] schedstats additions for sched-balance-fork

2005-02-24 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [PATCH 11/13] sched-domains aware balance-on-fork > [PATCH 12/13] schedstats additions for sched-balance-fork > [PATCH 13/13] basic tuning STREAMS numbers tricky. It's pretty much the only benchmark that 1) relies on being able t

Re: [PATCH 12/13] schedstats additions for sched-balance-fork

2005-02-24 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [PATCH 11/13] sched-domains aware balance-on-fork [PATCH 12/13] schedstats additions for sched-balance-fork [PATCH 13/13] basic tuning STREAMS numbers tricky. It's pretty much the only benchmark that 1) relies on being able to allocate alot of RAM

Re: [PATCH 12/13] schedstats additions for sched-balance-fork

2005-02-24 Thread Nick Piggin
Ingo Molnar wrote: * Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [PATCH 11/13] sched-domains aware balance-on-fork [PATCH 12/13] schedstats additions for sched-balance-fork [PATCH 13/13] basic tuning STREAMS numbers tricky. It's pretty much the only benchmark that 1) relies on being able to allocate

[PATCH 12/13] schedstats additions for sched-balance-fork

2005-02-23 Thread Nick Piggin
12/13 Add SCHEDSTAT statistics for sched-balance-fork. Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/sched.h === --- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/sched.h 2005-02-24 17:39:07.616911007 +1100 +++

[PATCH 12/13] schedstats additions for sched-balance-fork

2005-02-23 Thread Nick Piggin
12/13 Add SCHEDSTAT statistics for sched-balance-fork. Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/sched.h === --- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/sched.h 2005-02-24 17:39:07.616911007 +1100 +++