From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 02:59:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 02:59:31 -0500 Received: from packet.digeo.com ([12.110.80.53]:16774 "EHLO packet.digeo.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 02:59:30 -0500 Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 00:10:02 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Mike Galbraith Cc: mingo@elte.hu, torvalds@transmeta.com, rml@tech9.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] "HT scheduler", sched-2.5.63-B3 Message-Id: <20030307001002.74b8662b.akpm@digeo.com> In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030307085949.00ce8008@pop.gmx.net> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030307075851.00cf5448@pop.gmx.net> <5.2.0.9.2.20030307085949.00ce8008@pop.gmx.net> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.9 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i586-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Mar 2003 08:09:58.0455 (UTC) FILETIME=[F1DD3C70:01C2E480] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Mike Galbraith wrote: > > ... > Best would be for other testers to run some tests. With the make -j30 > weirdness, I _suspect_ that other oddities (hmm... multi-client db load... > query service time) will show. > Yes, this is the second surprise interaction between the CPU scheduler and the IO system. Perhaps. In your case it seems that you're simply unable to generate the amount of concurrency which you used to. Which would make it purely a CPU scheduler thing. It is not necessarily a bad thing (unless your total runtime has increased?) but we need to understand what has happened. What filesystem are you using?