lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Apr]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [TEST RESULT]massive_intr.c -- cfs/vanilla/sd-0.40
At Sat, 14 Apr 2007 14:02:20 +0200,
Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
>
> * surya.prabhakar@wipro.com <surya.prabhakar@wipro.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Ingo,
> > Did a test with massive_intr.c on a standard linux desktop.
> > for vanilla, con's Sd-0.40 and cfs.
>
> thanks!
>
> > [surya@bluegenie tests]$ ./massive_intr 10 10
> > 002435 00000120
> > 002439 00000120
> > 002441 00000120
> > 002434 00000120
> > 002436 00000120
> > 002440 00000120
> > 002432 00000120
> > 002437 00000120
> > 002433 00000120
> > 002438 00000120
> >
> > Felt it is too much fair, will try another pass ;)
>
> hehe :)
>
> > [surya@bluegenie tests]$ ./massive_intr 10 10
> > 002961 00000121
> > 002965 00000120
> > 002964 00000121
> > 002959 00000120
> > 002956 00000121
> > 002963 00000121
> > 002960 00000121
> > 002962 00000121
> > 002958 00000122
> > 002957 00000122
>
> btw., other schedulers might work better with some more test-time: i'd
> suggest to use 60 seconds (./massive_intr 10 60) [or maybe more, using
> more threads] to see long-term fairness effects.

I tested CFS with massive_intr. I did long term, many CPUs, and many
processes cases.

Test environment
================

- kernel: 2.6.21-rc6-CFS
- run time: 300 secs
- # of CPU: 1 or 4
- # of processes: 200 or 800

Result
======

+---------+-----------+-------+------+------+--------+
| # of | # of | avg | max | min | stdev |
| CPUs | processes | (*1) | (*2) | (*3) | (*4) |
+---------+-----------+-------+------+------+--------+
| 1(i386) | | 117.9 | 123 | 115 | 1.2 |
+---------| 200 +-------+------+------+--------+
| | | 750.2 | 767 | 735 | 10.6 |
| 4(ia64) +-----------+-------+------+------+--------+
| | 800(*5) | 187.3 | 189 | 186 | 0.8 |
+---------+-----------+-------+------+------+--------+

*1) average number of loops among all processes
*2) maximum number of loops among all processes
*3) minimum number of loops among all processes
*4) standard deviation
*5) Its # of processes per CPU is equal to first test case.

Pretty good! CFS seems to be fair in any situation.

Satoru
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-04-16 10:31    [W:0.081 / U:0.748 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site