On Fri, 6 Jul 2001, Sasha Pachev wrote:
> On Friday 06 July 2001 13:24, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > On Fri, 6 Jul 2001, Sasha Pachev wrote:
> >
> > > Upon further investigation and testing, it turned out that the kernel was
> not
> > > at fault - the problem was high mutex contention, which caused fre
On Friday 06 July 2001 13:24, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jul 2001, Sasha Pachev wrote:
>
> > Upon further investigation and testing, it turned out that the kernel was
not
> > at fault - the problem was high mutex contention, which caused frequent
> > context switches, and the idle CPU was a
On Fri, 6 Jul 2001, Sasha Pachev wrote:
> Upon further investigation and testing, it turned out that the kernel was not
> at fault - the problem was high mutex contention, which caused frequent
> context switches, and the idle CPU was apparently from the scheduler waiting
> for the original CPU t
On Tuesday 03 July 2001 12:51, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 12:25:12PM -0600, Sasha Pachev wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have observed a rather strange behaviour doing a multi-threaded CPU
> > benchmark on an 8-way machine running 2.4.2 SMP kernel. Even when the
> > priority is reni
On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 12:25:12PM -0600, Sasha Pachev wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have observed a rather strange behaviour doing a multi-threaded CPU
> benchmark on an 8-way machine running 2.4.2 SMP kernel. Even when the
> priority is reniced to the highest possible value, I am still unable to reach
Hi,
I have observed a rather strange behaviour doing a multi-threaded CPU
benchmark on an 8-way machine running 2.4.2 SMP kernel. Even when the
priority is reniced to the highest possible value, I am still unable to reach
more than 50% CPU utilization. My benchmark just creates a bunch of thre
6 matches
Mail list logo
