Re: BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 00000002

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Arjan van de Ven
Date: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 - 10:22 am

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 18:31:13 +0200
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:


but if you have 2 threads that share a lot of data, it's the opposite.

Or if you have a bunch of things which are smaller than the cache... 
(and they do share, for example glibc will be largely shared).

it's not a clear heavy loss, it's one of those "depends" cases.
(which sucks)


That's not what datacenter people say. As long as power gain is bigger
than performance loss.. they tend to want it.

Also "significantly" is extremely subjective, like in this case it can
be a win or a loss, depending.


that's a fine kernel policy.

Distros will override this policy if their users tell them they're
willing to do the tradeoff.. they will pick that default. In fact..
that's a big part of their job.. 


-- 
If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@linux.intel.com
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference ..., Frederik Deweerdt, (Mon Jul 28, 3:26 pm)
Re: BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference ..., Arjan van de Ven, (Tue Jul 29, 6:56 am)
Re: BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference ..., Arjan van de Ven, (Tue Jul 29, 8:30 am)
Re: BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference ..., Arjan van de Ven, (Tue Jul 29, 10:22 am)