Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263340AbUC3Hk1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Mar 2004 02:40:27 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263346AbUC3Hk1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Mar 2004 02:40:27 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:15326 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263340AbUC3Hjd (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Mar 2004 02:39:33 -0500 Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] [patch] sched-domain cleanups, sched-2.6.5-rc2-mm2-A3 From: Arjan van de Ven Reply-To: arjanv@redhat.com To: Andi Kleen Cc: Nick Piggin , mingo@elte.hu, jun.nakajima@intel.com, ricklind@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, kernel@kolivas.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, anton@samba.org, lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, mbligh@aracnet.com In-Reply-To: <20040330091323.5c0f557a.ak@suse.de> References: <7F740D512C7C1046AB53446D372001730111990F@scsmsx402.sc.intel.com> <20040325154011.GB30175@wotan.suse.de> <20040325190944.GB12383@elte.hu> <20040325162121.5942df4f.ak@suse.de> <20040325193913.GA14024@elte.hu> <20040325203032.GA15663@elte.hu> <20040329084531.GB29458@wotan.suse.de> <4068066C.507@yahoo.com.au> <20040329080150.4b8fd8ef.ak@suse.de> <20040329114635.GA30093@elte.hu> <20040329221434.4602e062.ak@suse.de> <4068B692.9020307@yahoo.com.au> <20040330083450.368eafc6.ak@suse.de> <40691BCE.2010302@yahoo.com.au> <20040330091323.5c0f557a.ak@suse.de> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-WxBIz8Zjk+E3fykLEu9B" Organization: Red Hat, Inc. Message-Id: <1080632295.4679.6.camel@laptop.fenrus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 (1.4.5-7) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 09:38:15 +0200 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1271 Lines: 38 --=-WxBIz8Zjk+E3fykLEu9B Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Regression on what workload? The 2.4 kernel who did the > early balancing didn't seem to have problems. well the hard balance is between a program that just splits of one thread and has those 2 threads working closely together (in which case you want the 2 threads to be together on the same quad in a quad-like setup) and a program that splits of a thread and has the 2 threads working basically entirely independent. Benchmarks are typically of the later kind... but real world applications ???? The ones I can think of using threads are of the former kind. --=-WxBIz8Zjk+E3fykLEu9B Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBAaSPnxULwo51rQBIRAs+1AJwMbEjf6jyHm6VHj9MY4LS4G3qfnwCgluMZ 1xovZdzKDH0rHM/KEjvy5uY= =aoLR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-WxBIz8Zjk+E3fykLEu9B-- - 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/