Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 3 Nov 2001 14:10:20 -0800 (PST) | From | Davide Libenzi <> | Subject | Re: [Lse-tech] Re: [PATCH][RFC] Proposal For A More Scalable Scheduler ... |
| |
On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, Hubertus Franke wrote:
> One more. Throughout our MQ evaluation, it was also true that > the overall performance particularly for large thread counts was > very sensitive to the goodness function, that why a na_goodness_local > was introduced.
Yes it is, but the real question is - It is better a save a few clock cycles in goodness() or achieve a better process scheduling decisions ?
- Davide
- 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/
| |