lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Sep]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements
    Date
    Ingo Molnar <mingo <at> elte.hu> writes:


    > For example 'Compile' latencies:
    >
    > --- Benchmarking simulated cpu of Audio in the presence of simulated Load
    > Latency +/- SD (ms) Max Latency % Desired CPU %
    Deadlines Met
    > v2.6.30: Compile 0.003 +/- 0.00426 0.014 100 100
    > BFS: Compile 0.007 +/- 0.00751 0.019 100 100
    >
    > but ... with a near 100% standard deviation that's pretty hard to
    > judge. The Max Latency went from 14 usecs under v2.6.30 to 19 usecs
    > on BFS.
    >
    [...]
    > Ingo
    >

    This just struck me : maybe what desktop users *feel* is exactly that : current
    approach is too fine-grained, trying to achieve the minimum latency with *most*
    reproductible result (less stddev) at all cost ? And BFS just doesn't care?
    I know this sounds like heresy.

    [ the space below is to satisfy the brain-dead GMane posting engine].










    Lukasz





    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-09-08 14:07    [W:0.023 / U:59.260 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site