On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 07:33:56PM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
quoted text
> On Wednesday 18 April 2007 18:55, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > Again, for comparison 2.6.21-rc7 mainline:
> >
> > 508.87user 32.47system 2:17.82elapsed 392%CPU
> > 509.05user 32.25system 2:17.84elapsed 392%CPU
> > 508.75user 32.26system 2:17.83elapsed 392%CPU
> > 508.63user 32.17system 2:17.88elapsed 392%CPU
> > 509.01user 32.26system 2:17.90elapsed 392%CPU
> > 509.08user 32.20system 2:17.95elapsed 392%CPU
> >
> > So looking at elapsed time, a granularity of 100ms is just behind the
> > mainline score. However it is using slightly less user time and
> > slightly more idle time, which indicates that balancing might have got
> > a bit less aggressive.
> >
> > But anyway, it conclusively shows the efficiency impact of such tiny
> > timeslices.
> 
> See test.kernel.org for how (the now defunct) SD was performing on kernbench. 
> It had low latency _and_ equivalent throughput to mainline. Set the standard 
> appropriately on both counts please.

I can give it a run. Got an updated patch against -rc7?

-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/