Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: [BENCHMARK] 100Hz preempt v nopreempt contest results | From | Robert Love <> | Date | 03 Jun 2003 10:05:58 -0700 |
| |
On Mon, 2003-06-02 at 23:39, Con Kolivas wrote:
> Note this time the ratio is less useful since they are both 100Hz. The > difference this time shows a large preempt improvement in process_load much > like 1000Hz did. Interestingly, even unloaded kernels no_load and cache_load > runs are faster with preempt. Only in xtar_load (repeatedly extracting a tar > with multiple small files) was no preempt faster.
Thanks for running these, Con.
I think this is an example of kernel preemption doing exactly what we want it to (improve interactive performance)... probably primarily because of the more accurate timeslice distribution.
Would be interested to figure out why xtar_load is slower.
Robert Love
- 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/
|  |