From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 15 16:26:21 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A6A6106579D for ; Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:26:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from asmrookie@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ww0-f42.google.com (mail-ww0-f42.google.com [74.125.82.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D31A88FC0C for ; Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:26:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wgbds13 with SMTP id ds13so1377914wgb.1 for ; Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:26:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=DO7ACBjoPPpDM3ygvSwYB5UwKbUXgxIPUYjuPY0gHQc=; b=ADERguF3ny0KDvSHkZPFlIDTyjeyDLZ4qHhXnOz76TDP5uajzHCm9IT4A1yACP6wvb Uc8DIaIx+BZWyZHUDBH1xfHmETaSJRsfGnUULx3OMXujnVWLAbofioeRczvgJ53mb3Xr XgPvkU7Nz3Y1Ckyaj8QMF/i27gWWouNz/rxvY= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.137.230 with SMTP id y80mr1352142wei.56.1323966379781; Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:26:19 -0800 (PST) Sender: asmrookie@gmail.com Received: by 10.216.171.8 with HTTP; Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:26:19 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4EE7093E.4050006@digsys.bg> References: <4EE1EAFE.3070408@m5p.com> <4EE22421.9060707@gmail.com> <4EE6060D.5060201@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de> <20111213073615.GA69641@icarus.home.lan> <4EE7093E.4050006@digsys.bg> Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 17:26:19 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: lZg6Px7ci9GZs18OqscJL78v0z8 Message-ID: From: Attilio Rao To: Daniel Kalchev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:26:21 -0000 2011/12/13 Daniel Kalchev : > > > On 13.12.11 09:36, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: >> >> I personally would find it interesting if someone with a higher-end system >> (e.g. 2 physical CPUs, with 6 or 8 cores per CPU) was to do the same test >> (changing -jX to -j{numofcores} of course). > > > Is 4 way 8 core Opteron ok? That is 32 cores, 64GB RAM. > > Testing with buildworld in my opinion is not adequate, as it involves way > too much I/O. Any advice on proper testing methodology? I'm sure that I/O and pmap subsystem contention (because of buildworld) and TLB shootdown overhead (because of 32 CPUs) will be so overwhelming that you are not really going to benchmark the scheduler activity at all. However I still don't get what you want to verify exactly? Thanks, Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein