[lkml]   [2005]   [Jul]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Giving developers clue how many testers verified certain kernel version
On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 21:15 -0500, Alejandro Bonilla wrote:
> OK, I will, but I first of all need to learn how to tell if benchmarks
> are better or worse.

Con's interactivity benchmark looks quite promising for finding
scheduler related interactivity regressions. It certainly has confirmed
what we already knew re: SCHED_FIFO performance, if we extend that to
SCHED_OTHER which is a more interesting problem then there's serious
potential for improvement. AFAIK no one has posted any 2.4 vs 2.6
interbench results yet...

I suspect a lot of the boot time issue is due to userspace. But, it
should be trivial to benchmark this one, just use the TSC or whatever to
measure the time from first kernel entry to execing init().


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: 2005-07-23 05:24    [W:0.044 / U:19.232 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site