From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932483AbWALCXP (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jan 2006 21:23:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932676AbWALCXP (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jan 2006 21:23:15 -0500 Received: from omta05ps.mx.bigpond.com ([144.140.83.195]:53185 "EHLO omta05ps.mx.bigpond.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932483AbWALCXO (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jan 2006 21:23:14 -0500 Message-ID: <43C5BD8F.3000307@bigpond.net.au> Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 13:23:11 +1100 From: Peter Williams User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Con Kolivas CC: "Martin J. Bligh" , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: -mm seems significanty slower than mainline on kernbench References: <43C45BDC.1050402@google.com> <200601121218.47744.kernel@kolivas.org> <43C5B0F6.5090500@bigpond.net.au> <200601121236.07522.kernel@kolivas.org> In-Reply-To: <200601121236.07522.kernel@kolivas.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH PLAIN at omta05ps.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.133.38] using ID pwil3058@bigpond.net.au at Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:23:11 +0000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Con Kolivas wrote: > On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:29 pm, Peter Williams wrote: > >>Con Kolivas wrote: >> >>>This is a shot in the dark. We haven't confirmed 1. there is a problem 2. >>>that this is the problem nor 3. that this patch will fix the problem. >> >>I disagree. I think that there is a clear mistake in my original patch >>that this patch fixes. > > > I agree with you on that. The real concern is that we were just about to push > it upstream. So where does this leave us? I propose we delay merging the > "improved smp nice handling" patch into mainline pending your further > changes. I think that they're already in 2.6.15 minus my "move load not tasks" modification which I was expecting to go into 2.6.16. Is that what you meant? If so I think this is a small and obvious fix that shouldn't delay the merging of "move load not tasks" into the mainline. But it's not my call. Peter -- Peter Williams pwil3058@bigpond.net.au "Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious." -- Ambrose Bierce