On Friday 25 October 2002 00:38, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> > The situation is really funny: Everybody seems to agree that the design
> > ideas in my NUMA aproach are sane and exactly what we want to have on
> > a NUMA platform in the end. But instead of concentrating on tuning the
> > parameters for the many different NUMA platforms and reshaping this
> > aproach to make it acceptable, IBM concentrates on a very much stripped
> > down aproach.
>
> From my point of view, the reason for focussing on this was that
> your scheduler degraded the performance on my machine, rather than
> boosting it. Half of that was the more complex stuff you added on
> top ... it's a lot easier to start with something simple that works
> and build on it, than fix something that's complex and doesn't work
> well.
You're talking about one of the first 2.5 versions of the patch. It
changed a lot since then, thanks to your feedback, too.
> I still haven't been able to get your scheduler to boot for about
> the last month without crashing the system. Andrew says he has it
> booting somehow on 2.5.44-mm4, so I'll steal his kernel tommorow and
> see how it looks. If the numbers look good for doing boring things
> like kernel compile, SDET, etc, I'm happy.
I thought this problem is well understood! For some reasons independent of
my patch you have to boot your machines with the "notsc" option. This
leaves the cache_decay_ticks variable initialized to zero which my patch
doesn't like. I'm trying to deal with this inside the patch but there is
still a small window when the variable is zero. In my opinion this needs
to be fixed somewhere in arch/i386/kernel/smpboot.c. Booting a machine
with cache_decay_ticks=0 is pure nonsense, as it switches off cache
affinity which you absolutely need! So even if "notsc" is a legal option,
it should be fixed such that it doesn't leave your machine without cache
affinity. That would anyway give you a falsified behavior of the O(1)
scheduler.
Erich
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 31 2002 - 22:00:26 EST