On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 08:14:42AM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote: > .. i'd rather you narrow down _why_ it's performing better before committing > it. > > Otherwise it may just creep up again after someone does another change > in an unrelated part of the kernel. Or penalize some other set of machines where this is currently not a problem.
The cause should be identified before any change is committed. > > You're using instructions-retired; how about using l1/l2 cache loads, > stores, etc? There's a lot more CPU counters available. > > You have a very cool problem to solve. If I could reproduce it locally > I'd give you a hand. > > Thanks, > > > > -adrian
pgpY5K5ioAQsN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
