Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266101AbUFPDOr (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jun 2004 23:14:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266089AbUFPDND (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jun 2004 23:13:03 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:62600 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266086AbUFPDLW (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jun 2004 23:11:22 -0400 Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 20:10:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Nick Piggin cc: Herbert Xu , "Martin J. Bligh" , mingo@elte.hu, kernel@kolivas.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, piggin@cyberone.com.au, akpm@osdl.org, wli@holomorphy.com, markw@osdl.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Performance regression in 2.6.7-rc3 In-Reply-To: <40CFB8FD.2010601@yahoo.com.au> Message-ID: References: <40CFB8FD.2010601@yahoo.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 900 Lines: 24 On Wed, 16 Jun 2004, Nick Piggin wrote: > > I think balance on clone probably needs to be turned off by default > presently. > > It slows down a simple thread creation test by a factor of 7(!) here, > and has quite a few not too difficult to imagine performance problems. I agree. However, I still think we should do my suggested "wake_up_new(p,clone_flags)" thing, and then have the logic on whether to try to care about threading or not be in schedule.c, not in kernel/fork.c. The fact is, fork.c shouldn't try to make scheduling decisions. But it could inform the scheduler about the new process, and THAT can then make the decisions. Linus - 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/