Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261598AbTHZQiI (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Aug 2003 12:38:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261918AbTHZQiI (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Aug 2003 12:38:08 -0400 Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.198.35]:12798 "EHLO rwcrmhc11.comcast.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261598AbTHZQiE (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Aug 2003 12:38:04 -0400 Message-ID: <3F4B8C8A.2060805@ccs.neu.edu> Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 12:36:26 -0400 From: Stan Bubrouski User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030819 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: max@vortex.physik.uni-konstanz.de CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.6.0-test4 shocking (HT) benchmarking (wrong logic./phys. HT CPU distinction?) References: <200308261552.44541.max@vortex.physik.uni-konstanz.de> In-Reply-To: <200308261552.44541.max@vortex.physik.uni-konstanz.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1521 Lines: 36 max@vortex.physik.uni-konstanz.de wrote: > Hello all you great Linux hackers, > > in our fine physics group we recently bought a DUAL XEON P4 2666MHz, 2GB, with > hyper-threading support and I had the honour of making the thing work. In the > process I also did some benchmarking using two different kernels (stock > SuSE-8.2-Pro 2.4.20-64GB-SMP, and the latest and greatest vanilla > 2.6.0-test4). I benchmarked > > [1] kernel compiles (after 'cat'ting all files >/dev/null, into the buffer > cache) and > > [2] running time of a multi-threaded numerical simulation making extensive use > of FFTs, using the fftw.org library. > > To cut the detailed story (below) short, the results puzzle me to a certain > extend: The physical/logical CPU distinction, which 2.6.0 is supposed to make I'm no kernel developer so take my opinion as worth more than anyone else here (much less). The new scheduler in the 2.6 kernels is still being tweaked by Con and Igno, et al. But beyond that there are several new ways to tweak the scheduler designed to handled different loads, amounts of mem. etc... Skimming the past few months of the mail list archives for what to tweak and how may enhance the tasks you are currently testing. My $0.01 (I'm cheap like that). -sb - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/