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    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site