Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 19:29:59 -0400 From: "Josh Carroll" <josh.carroll@gmail.com> To: "Jeff Roberson" <jroberson@chesapeake.net> Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ULE vs. 4BSD in RELENG_7 Message-ID: <8cb6106e0711031629j68e181ccra0f16ee6f42ed982@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20071102150028.R544@10.0.0.1> References: <8cb6106e0710230902x4edf2c8eu2d912d5de1f5d4a2@mail.gmail.com> <20071024111105.M598@10.0.0.1> <8cb6106e0710241229i12852d8cq436f4c955ac62c56@mail.gmail.com> <20071024133240.X598@10.0.0.1> <8cb6106e0710251925s2db0117cvcb67321b08d7b2a1@mail.gmail.com> <20071102102331.G544@10.0.0.1> <8cb6106e0711021306w10c48a15s99eab526064ac814@mail.gmail.com> <20071102150028.R544@10.0.0.1>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> What would be interesting to know is if the sum of the temperatures is any > different. 4BSD gets a much more random distribution of load because a > thread is run on whatever cpu context switches next. ULE will have > specific load patterns since it scans lists of cpus in a fixed order to > assign load. So that means it prefers to run on lower numbered cpus if > they are idle. This should have a side effect of allowing unused cores to > powerdown more frequently than with 4BSD although I have not verified this > in practice. The sum of the core temperatures when the system is idle is the same for both ULE and 4BSD. 125 C in my case (31.25 C average). Under load, the sum (again for both) is 184 C. So you're absolutely correct, while one core seems to get these short bursts (probably my rrd script doing its thing), perhaps this is shared over the cores with 4BSD. The overall temperature remains the same. Josh
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8cb6106e0711031629j68e181ccra0f16ee6f42ed982>