[lkml]   [2007]   [Sep]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [announce] CFS-devel, performance improvements
    On Sep 13, 2007, at 21:47:25, Rob Hussey wrote:
    > On 9/13/07, Ingo Molnar <> wrote:
    >> are you sure this is happening with the latest iteration of the
    >> patch too? (with the combo-3.patch?) You can pick it up from here:
    >> v2.6.23-rc6-v21-combo-3.patch
    > I managed to work it all out (it was my fault after all), and I've now
    > made the changes you suggested to my .configs for 2.6.23-rc1 and
    > 2.6.23-rc6. I've done the benchmarks all over, including tests with
    > the task bound to a single core. Without further ado, the numbers I
    > promised:
    > [...]
    > I've made graphs like last time:

    Well looking at these graphs (and the fixed one from your second
    email), it sure looks a lot like CFS is doing at *least* as well as
    the old scheduler in every single test, and doing much better in most
    of them (in addition it's much more consistent between runs). This
    seems to jive with all the other benchmarks and overall empirical
    testing that everyone has been doing. Overall I have to say a job
    well done for Ingo, Peter, Con, and all the other major contributors
    to this impressive endeavor.

    Kyle Moffett

    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: 2007-09-14 09:03    [W:0.044 / U:14.512 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site