I was gzipping a large (~800MB) file on a dual athlon box. the gzip prcess
was bouncing back and forth between the two CPUs. I actually was able to
gzip faster by starting up setiathome to keep one CPU busy and force the
scheduler to keep the gzip on a single CPU (I ran things several times to
verify it was actually faster)
On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 10:05:21 -0700
> From: Mike Kravetz <email@example.com>
> To: Larry McVoy <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Cc: Davide Libenzi <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org,
> Andi Kleen <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: CPU affinity & IPI latency
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2001 at 05:36:41PM -0700, Larry McVoy wrote:
> > Be careful tuning for LMbench (says the author :-)
> > Especially this benchmark. It's certainly possible to get dramatically better
> > SMP numbers by pinning all the lat_ctx processes to a single CPU, because
> > the benchmark is single threaded. In other words, if we have 5 processes,
> > call them A, B, C, D, and E, then the benchmark is passing a token from
> > A to B to C to D to E and around again.
> > If the amount of data/instructions needed by all 5 processes fits in the
> > cache and you pin all the processes to the same CPU you'll get much
> > better performance than simply letting them float.
> > But making the system do that naively is a bad idea.
> I agree, and can't imagine the system ever attempting to take this
> into account and leave these 5 tasks on the same CPU.
> At the other extreme is my observation that 2 tasks on an 8 CPU
> system are 'round robined' among all 8 CPUs. I think having the
> 2 tasks stay on 2 of the 8 CPUs would be an improvement with respect
> to CPU affinity. Actually, the scheduler does 'try' to do this.
> It is clear that the behavior of lat_ctx bypasses almost all of
> the scheduler's attempts at CPU affinity. The real question is,
> "How often in running 'real workloads' are the schduler's attempts
> at CPU affinity bypassed?".
> Mike Kravetz email@example.com
> IBM Linux Technology Center
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/