On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 02:17:22PM +1000, Peter Williams wrote:
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 06:29:54AM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
All things are not equal; they all have different properties. I like
getting rid of the queue-swapping artifacts as ebs and cfs have done,
as the artifacts introduced there are nasty IMNSHO. I'm queueing up
a demonstration of epoch expiry scheduling artifacts as a testcase,
albeit one with no pass/fail semantics for its results, just detecting
scheduler properties.
That said, inequality/inequivalence is not a superiority/inferiority
ranking per se. What needs to come out of these discussions is a set
of standards which a candidate for mainline must pass to be considered
correct and a set of performance metrics by which to rank them. Video
game framerates and some sort of way to automate window wiggle tests
sound like good ideas, but automating such is beyond my userspace
programming abilities. An organization able to devote manpower to
devising such testcases will likely have to get involved for them to
happen, I suspect.
On a random note, limitations on kernel address space make O(lg(n))
effectively O(1), albeit with large upper bounds on the worst case
and an expected case much faster than the worst case.
-- wli
-
