From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 11:32:19 -0800 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: 2.6.4-mm2 Message-Id: <20040323113219.506a7581.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <1080069704.10668.122.camel@localhost> References: <20040314172809.31bd72f7.akpm@osdl.org> <200403181737.i2IHbCE09261@mail.osdl.org> <20040318100615.7f2943ea.akpm@osdl.org> <20040318192707.GV22234@suse.de> <20040318191530.34e04cb2.akpm@osdl.org> <20040318194150.4de65049.akpm@osdl.org> <20040319183906.I8594@osdlab.pdx.osdl.net> <1079975940.23641.580.camel@localhost> <20040322162729.2f2ddbe4.akpm@osdl.org> <1080069704.10668.122.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: maryedie@osdl.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: Mary Edie Meredith 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: aart@kvack.org