[lkml]   [2007]   [Apr]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [ck] Re: Ten percent test
    Am Montag 09 April 2007 schrieb Mike Galbraith:
    > On Mon, 2007-04-09 at 07:26 -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
    > > On Monday 09 April 2007 01:38, Mike Galbraith wrote:
    > > > On Sun, 2007-04-08 at 09:08 -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
    > > > > Hi,
    > > > >
    > > > > I am one of those who have been happily testing Con's patches.
    > > > >
    > > > > They work better than mainline here.
    > > >
    > > > (I tried a UP kernel yesterday, and even a single kernel build
    > > > would make noticeable hitches if I move a window around. YMMV etc.)
    > >
    > > Interesting. I run UP amd64, 1000HZ, 1.25G, preempt off (on causes
    > > kernel stalls with no messages - but that is another story). I do
    > > not notice a single make. When several are running the desktop
    > > slows down a bit. I do not have X niced. Wonder why we see such
    > > different results?
    > Probably because with your processor, in general cc1 can get the job
    > done faster, as can X. The latency big hit happens when you hit the
    > end of the rotation. You simply don't hit it as often as I do. Anyone
    > with an old PIII box should hit the wall very quickly indeed. I
    > haven't had time to try it here.


    I am running + sd-0.44 on an IBM ThinkPad T23 that I use as my
    Amarok machine[1]. It has a Pentium 3 with 1.13 GHz using ondemand
    frequency scaling and XFS as filesystem.

    So far music playback has been perfect even when I had it building kernel
    packages while wildly clicking around starting apps and then moving the
    Amarok window like mad while solid window moving is enabled. Amarok /
    xine continued to play the music totally unimpressed of that.

    So for me from a users point of view who wants good music playback *no
    matter what*, this is already perfect. Also the desktop feels quite
    snappy to me. It was only slow on anything I/O bound but thats
    understandable IMHO when make-kpkg tar -bzips the kernel source while 20
    KDE applications are starting and Amarok plays music.

    Should I try any specific tests? This also goes out to anybody else,
    especially to you, Con. So if you want me to run some benchmarks, please
    tell me. I am not experienced in benchmarking, but if you tell me what to
    do, I can try it out. I prefer benchmarks that do not disrupt music
    playback, but can run more aggressive benchmarks over night. I think it
    might be good to use a benchmark that isn't I/O bound to really test the
    scheduler... but as said I am no expert on that and real life loads
    usually are I/O bound as well.

    Have to have an carefully eye on the harddisk though...

    Apr 22 11:51:06 deepdance smartd[3116]: Device: /dev/sda, SMART Prefailure
    Attribute: 3 Spin_Up_Time changed from 154 to 150

    (well threshold is at 033, so still plenty to go, hope it will take some
    time till the next change)

    [1] ;)

    Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald -
    GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-04-22 13:23    [W:0.023 / U:58.620 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site