[lkml]   [2001]   [Aug]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Updated Linux kernel preemption patches
On Sun, 2001-08-26 at 23:06, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> Congratulations on showing evidence that preemption can improve performance
> under some loads, especially the all-important kernel compile. Don't be too
> worried about the dbench 1 results, dbench can vary by a factor of 2
> depending on the alignment of the planets (ask Tridge). Try something more
> stable like bonnie.

I would be happy to run some other tests. I was happy to see the kernel
compile prove faster, and I fully expected the dbench 16 results to show
an improvement. But, while I assumed dbench 1 may show a degradation in
performance, I was surprised it was so high.

My main goal in updating Nigel's patches to recent kernels was to
accomplish just this: get some more data points, some more benchmarks,
and more eyes on the code and systems running the patch.

I am not an audio guy or otherwise in need of a lower-latency system,
but the possibility for an overall improvement in the kernel (even at
the expense of some cases) is worthwhile, to me.

> The theory goes that preemption improves performance by cutting down the time
> between IO completion and user task resume, with only a small cost in extra
> locking. It would be nice to see profiling statistics to support this idea.

Anyone running the patch want to profile some situations and reach some

Robert M. Love
rml at
rml at

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: 2005-03-22 12:58    [W:0.099 / U:0.348 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site