lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jun]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: call for more SD versus CFS comparisons (was: Re: [ck] Mainline plans)
Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Am Dienstag 12 Juni 2007 schrieb Miguel Figueiredo:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> some results based on massing_intr.c by Satoru, can be found on
>> http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/tools/massive_intr.c
>
> Hi Miquel, Ingo, Con!
>
[...]

> Any suggestions?

I read somewhere in the list that X itself makes lots of hocus pocus
that affect the behavior of programs running inside X itself (i even
read about X's own scheduling - someone can confirm/deny it? - and evil
behavior on drivers).

If we look/test a fair/responsive scheduler isn't better to test it
outside X?
IMHO, X itself, it's too complex and may obscure our tests on
fairness/interactivity.

Anyone knows any good tests for interctivity?

[...]

--

Com os melhores cumprimentos/Best regards,

Miguel Figueiredo
http://www.DebianPT.org
-
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: 2007-06-15 23:23    [W:0.113 / U:0.276 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site