From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 11:57:25 -0700 From: "Martin J. Bligh" Subject: Re: 2.6.0-test3-mm1 Message-ID: <864380000.1060628245@flay> In-Reply-To: <20030811180552.GG32488@holomorphy.com> References: <20030809203943.3b925a0e.akpm@osdl.org> <94490000.1060612530@[10.10.2.4]> <20030811180552.GG32488@holomorphy.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: William Lee Irwin III Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: > On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 07:35:31AM -0700, Martin J. Bligh wrote: >> Degredation on kernbench is still there: >> Kernbench: (make -j N vmlinux, where N = 16 x num_cpus) >> Elapsed System User CPU >> 2.6.0-test3 45.97 115.83 571.93 1494.50 >> 2.6.0-test3-mm1 46.43 122.78 571.87 1496.00 >> Quite a bit of extra sys time. I thought the suspected part of the sched >> changes got backed out, but maybe I'm just not following it ... > > Is this with or without the unit conversion fix for the load balancer? > > It will be load balancing extra-aggressively without the fix. This is virgin ... can you point me back to the fix you mention? I missed that one. M. -- 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