Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, v3

From: Christoph Lameter
Date: Tue Apr 24 2007 - 13:40:08 EST

On Fri, 20 Apr 2007, Siddha, Suresh B wrote:

> > Last I checked it was workload-dependent, but there were things that
> > hammer it. I mostly know of the remote wakeup issue, but there could
> > be other things besides wakeups that do it, too.
> remote wakeup was the main issue and the 0.5% improvement was seen
> on a two node platform. Aligning it reduces the number of remote
> cachelines that needs to be touched as part of this wakeup.

.5% is usually in the noise ratio. Are you consistently seeing an
improvement or is that sporadic?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at