Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 30 Dec 2001 15:49:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 30 Dec 2001 15:49:04 -0500 Received: from flrtn-2-m1-236.vnnyca.adelphia.net ([24.55.67.236]:48518 "EHLO jyro.mirai.cx") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 30 Dec 2001 15:48:56 -0500 Message-ID: <3C2F7D49.9040606@pobox.com> Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 12:47:05 -0800 From: J Sloan Organization: J S Concepts User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.7) Gecko/20011221 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: timothy.covell@ashavan.org CC: Stephan von Krawczynski , Davide Libenzi , Dieter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?N=FCtzel?= , Robert Love , Linux Kernel List Subject: Re: [PATCH] Balanced Multi Queue Scheduler ... In-Reply-To: <200112292338.AAA29985@webserver.ithnet.com> <200112301951.fBUJoxSr011753@svr3.applink.net> 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 Timothy Covell wrote: >Ummm, on my Dual P-III (650MHz with 524988416 Bytes), my current Seti >efficiency is 5.35 CpF. That's a tad high/slower than an Ultra Sparc IIi >according to their stats. So, it would appear that being SMP is hurting my >performance a bit. Unless that is that you meant to run a seti instance for >each CPU? And this reminds me of how "make -j3 bzlilo" is slower than >"make -j2 bzlilo". > Eh? On my 4-way ppro, make -j4 is much faster than a simple "make" for kernel compilation. Almost linearly so - This is with recent 2.4.1x kernels BTW on Red Hat 7.1/7.2 Sorry to hear of your bizzare experiences - but then again, maybe you're running a 2.2.x kernel or something? cu jjs - 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/