Re: 2.5.36-mm1 dbench 512 profiles

[William Lee Irwin III]

At some point in the past, I wrote:
>> AFAICT, with one bottleneck out of the way, a new one merely arises to
>> take its place. Ugly. OTOH the qualitative difference is striking. The
>> interactive responsiveness of the machine, even when entirely unloaded,
>> is drastically improved, along with such nice things as init scripts
>> and kernel compiles also markedly faster. I suspect this is just the
>> wrong benchmark to show throughput benefits with.

On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 02:30:23PM -0700, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> Hmmm ... I think you need the NUMA aware scheduler ;-) 
> On the plus side, that does look like RCU pretty much obliterated the dcache
> problems ....

This sounds like a likely solution to the expense of load_balance().
Do you have a patch for it floating around?

Thanks,
Bill