From: Martin J. B. <mb...@ar...> - 2004-03-25 16:54:01
|
> We have found some performance regressions (e.g. SPECjbb) with the > scheduler on a large IA-64 NUMA machine, and we are debugging it. On SMP > machines, we haven't seen performance regressions. Is this the SPECjbb / Java thing that believes that sched_yield is a stable locking primitive? If so, it needs to be ignored ;-) That's the problem we had here, at least ... M. > Jun > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Andi Kleen [mailto:ak...@su...] >> Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 8:56 PM >> To: Ingo Molnar >> Cc: pi...@cy...; lin...@vg...; > ak...@os...; >> ke...@ko...; ru...@ru...; Nakajima, Jun; >> ric...@us...; an...@sa...; lse...@li...; >> mb...@ar... >> Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] [patch] sched-domain cleanups, > sched-2.6.5-rc2-mm2- >> A3 >> >> On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 09:28:09 +0100 >> Ingo Molnar <mi...@el...> wrote: >> >>> i've reviewed the sched-domains balancing patches for upstream > inclusion >>> and they look mostly fine. >> >> The main problem it has is that it performs quite badly on Opteron NUMA >> e.g. in the OpenMP STREAM test (much worse than the normal scheduler) >> >> -Andi > > |