Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 30 Jul 2007 12:03:56 -0700 (PDT) | From | david@lang ... | Subject | Re: [ck] Re: SD still better than CFS for 3d ?(was Re: 2.6.23-rc1) |
| |
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * david@lang.hm <david@lang.hm> wrote: > >>> Would you be interested in trying CFS and doing some numers perhaps? >>> It requires some work: you have to start up your favorite game in a >>> way that gives a reliable framerate number. (many games allow the >>> display of FPS in-game) In Quake3 i simply started the game and did >>> not move the player - that is something easy to reproduce. >> >> the one report that I saw said that the FPS numbers were overall the >> same, but what the reporter was seeing was that CFS was doing it in >> bursts of activity while SD was smoother. [...] > > which report is that, precisely? I'm not aware of any such report past > CFS v14 or so. > >> IIRC Linus responded with thoughts on granularity and the fact that >> changing from Hz 1000 to Hz 100 will increase the timeslices in CFS by >> 10x (which could be enough to trigger this sort of issue) > > ah, you mean Kasper Sandberg's report? That turned out to be based on an > older CFS version, not v2.6.23-rc1. Kasper said he'll redo his tests, > and if there's still any regression left we'll fix it.
probably. I delete lkml messages pretty agressivly so I don't have them around to refer to.
David Lang - 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/
| |