Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 10 Sep 2009 13:09:13 +0200 | From | Jens Axboe <> | Subject | Re: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements |
| |
On Thu, Sep 10 2009, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Thu, 2009-09-10 at 12:28 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > > > No difference. Then I tried switching NO_NEW_FAIR_SLEEPERS on, and then > > I get: > > > > Performance counter stats for 'xmodmap .xmodmap-carl': > > > > 9.009137 task-clock-msecs # 0.447 CPUs > > 18 context-switches # 0.002 M/sec > > 1 CPU-migrations # 0.000 M/sec > > 315 page-faults # 0.035 M/sec > > <not counted> cycles > > <not counted> instructions > > <not counted> cache-references > > <not counted> cache-misses > > > > 0.020167093 seconds time elapsed > > > > Woot! > > Something is very seriously hosed on that box... clock?
model name : Genuine Intel(R) CPU T2400 @ 1.83GHz
Throttles down to 1.00GHz when idle.
> Can you turn it back on, and do..
I guess you mean turn NEW_FAIR_SLEEPERS back on, correct?
> while sleep .1; do cat /proc/sched_debug >> foo; done > ..on one core, and (quickly;) xmodmap .xmodmap-carl, then send me a few > seconds worth (gzipped up) to eyeball?
Attached.
-- Jens Axboe
[unhandled content-type:application/octet-stream] | |