Re: aim7 scalability issue on 4 socket machine

[Hugh Dickins]

On Thu, 17 Sep 2009, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 10:02:19 +0800 "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > 
> > > So, Yanmin, please retest with http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/9/13/25
> > > and let us know if that works as well for you - thanks.
> > I tested Lee's patch and it does fix the issue.

Thanks for checking and reporting back, Yanmin.

> 
> Do we think we should cook up something for -stable?

Gosh, I laughed at Lee (sorry!) for suggesting it for -stable:
is stable really for getting a better number out of a benchmark?

I'd have thought the next release is the right place for that; but
I've no problem if you guys and the stable guys agree it's appropriate.

> 
> Either this is a regression or the workload is particularly obscure. 

I've not cross-checked descriptions, but assume Lee was actually
testing on exactly the same kind of upcoming Nehalem as Yanmin, and
that machine happens to have characteristics which show up badly here.

> 
> aim7 is sufficiently non-obscure to make me wonder what's happened here?

Not a regression, just the onward march of new hardware, I think.
Could easily be other such things in other places with other tests.

Hugh
--
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/