Messages in this thread | | | From | Con Kolivas <> | Subject | Re: [BENCHMARK] scheduler tunables with contest - exit_weight | Date | Wed, 25 Dec 2002 20:38:25 +1100 |
| |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 26 Dec 2002 12:24 am, Denis Vlasenko wrote: > On 21 December 2002 19:18, Con Kolivas wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > osdl hardware, contest results, 2.5.52-mm2 with scheduler tunable - > > exit weight (ew1= exit weight ==1 and so on) > > > > io_load: > > Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio > > ew0 [5] 105.3 90 16 22 2.91 > > ew1 [5] 86.4 97 12 18 2.39 > > ew2 [5] 74.9 109 9 18 2.07 > > ew3 [5] 84.2 100 11 19 2.33 > > ew4 [5] 83.8 102 10 18 2.31 > > ew5 [5] 89.9 93 12 20 2.48 > > ew6 [5] 97.5 88 13 20 2.69 > > ew7 [5] 89.2 95 12 20 2.46 > > In spite of worrying reports of decreasing single task performance, > does it make sense to add "null_load" test? ;)
I've simplified the data. There is no significant difference in the no_load groups with changes to the scheduler tunables over useful ranges.
Con -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+CXyRF6dfvkL3i1gRAtSyAJ9XThpp5iCI1FcjDxVOESbm5ialywCgg7Vb HN+jWurjIwXngqCUOmDWhh0= =7Iy8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - 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/
| |