Re: Possible bug from kernel 2.6.22 and above, 2.6.24-rc4

[Ingo Molnar]

* Jie Chen <chen@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I just ran the same test on two 2.6.24-rc4 kernels: one with 
> CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED on and the other with CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED 
> off. The odd behavior I described in my previous e-mails were still 
> there for both kernels. Let me know If I can be any more help. Thank 
> you.

ok, i had a look at your data, and i think this is the result of the 
scheduler balancing out to idle CPUs more agressively than before. Doing 
that is almost always a good idea though - but indeed it can result in 
"bad" numbers if all you do is to measure the ping-pong "performance" 
between two threads. (with no real work done by any of them).

the moment you saturate the system a bit more, the numbers should 
improve even with such a ping-pong test.

do you have testcode (or a modification of your testcase sourcecode) 
that simulates a real-life situation where 2.6.24-rc4 performs not as 
well as you'd like it to see? (or if qmt.tar.gz already contains that 
then please point me towards that portion of the test and how i should 
run it - 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/