Re: 2.6.4-mm2

[Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>]

Mary Edie Meredith <maryedie@osdl.org> wrote:
>
> > 36% regression due to the CPU scheduler changes?  ow.
>  > 
>  > And that machine is a PIII, so presumably the setting of CONFIG_SCHED_SMT
>  > makes no difference.
>  > 
>  > >From a quick look at the material you have there it appears that this
>  > workload also is very I/O bound.  It's a little surprising that the CPU
>  > scheduler could make so much difference.
>  I'm not sure why you think this is IO bound. For 
>  the throughput phase of the test (from which the 
>  metric above is taken) there is very little physical 
>  IO except at the start when the updates occur.  They
>  finish in a few minutes, after which there is very
>  little.
> 
>  http://khack.osdl.org/stp/290304/results/plot/thuput.vmstat_io.png
>  http://khack.osdl.org/stp/290304/results/plot/thuput.vmstat.txt

There seems to be a large amount of idle time in the profiles and in the
vmstat trace.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"aart@kvack.org"> aart@kvack.org </a>