[lkml]   [2007]   [Sep]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Scheduler benchmarks - a follow-up

    * Rob Hussey <> wrote:

    > The obligatory graphs:

    btw., it's likely that if you turn off CONFIG_PREEMPT for .21 and for
    .22-ck1 they'll improve a bit too - so it's not fair to put the .23
    !PREEMPT numbers on the graph as the PREEMPT numbers of the other
    kernels. (it shows the .23 scheduler being faster than it really is)

    > A cursory glance suggests that performance wrt lat_ctx and hackbench
    > has increased (lower numbers), but degraded quite a lot for pipe-test.
    > The numbers for pipe-test are extremely stable though, while the
    > numbers for hackbench are more erratic (which isn't saying much since
    > the original numbers gave nearly a straight line). I'm still willing
    > to try out any more ideas.

    the pipe-test behavior looks like an outlier. !PREEMPT only removes code
    (which makes the code faster), so this could be a cache layout artifact.
    (or perhaps we preempt at a different point which is disadvantageous to
    caching?) Pipe-test is equivalent to "lat_ctx -s 0 2" so if there was a
    genuine slowdown it would show up in the lat_ctx graph - but the graph
    shows a speedup.

    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: 2007-09-18 10:51    [W:0.023 / U:3.484 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site