[lkml]   [2003]   [Aug]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [CFT][PATCH] new scheduler policy

Roger Luethi wrote:

>On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 11:53:01 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
>>I haven't run many tests on it - my mind blanked when I tried to
>>remember the scores of scheduler "exploits" thrown around. So if
>>anyone would like to suggest some, or better still, run some,
>>please do so. And be nice, this isn't my type of scheduler :P
>I timed a pathological benchmark from hell I've been playing with lately.
>Three consecutive runs following a fresh boot. Time is in seconds:
>2.4.21 821 21 25
>2.6.0-test3-mm1 724 946 896
>2.6.0-test3-mm1-nick 905 987 997
>Runtime with ideal scheduling: < 2 seconds (we're thrashing).

Cool. Can you post the benchmark source please?

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 13:47    [W:0.143 / U:5.164 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site