Re: [PATCH 00/27] Latest numa/core release, v16

[Ingo Molnar]

* Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> So because I did not have an old-glibc system like David's, I 
> did not know the actual page fault rate. If it is high enough 
> then nonlinear effects might cause such effects.
> 
> This is an entirely valid line of inquiry IMO.

Btw., when comparing against 'mainline' I routinely use a 
vanilla kernel that has the same optimization applied. (first I 
make sure it's not a regression to vanilla.)

I do that to factor out the linear component of the independent 
speedup: it would not be valid to compare vanilla against 
numa/core+optimization, but the comparison has to be:

       vanilla + optimization
  vs.
     numa/core + optimization

I did that with last night's numbers as well.

So any of this can only address a regression if a non-linear 
factor is in play.

Since I have no direct access to a regressing system I have to 
work with the theories that I can think of: one had a larger 
effect, the other had a smaller effect, the third one had no 
effect on David's system.

How would you have done it instead?

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/