lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Nov]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 00/27] Latest numa/core release, v16

* Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> 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


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-11-21 19:21    [W:0.117 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site