Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 08 Sep 2009 11:13:51 +0300 | From | Nikos Chantziaras <> | Subject | Re: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements |
| |
On 09/08/2009 11:04 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Pekka Pietikainen<pp@ee.oulu.fi> wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 10:57:01PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>>>> Could you profile it please? Also, what's the context-switch rate? >>>> >>>> As far as I can tell, the broadcom mips architecture does not have >>>> profiling support. It does only have some proprietary profiling >>>> registers that nobody wrote kernel support for, yet. >>> Well, what does 'vmstat 1' show - how many context switches are >>> there per second on the iperf server? In theory if it's a truly >>> saturated box, there shouldnt be many - just a single iperf task >> >> Yay, finally something that's measurable in this thread \o/ > > My initial posting in this thread contains 6 separate types of > measurements, rather extensive ones. Out of those, 4 measurements > were latency oriented, two were throughput oriented. Plenty of data, > plenty of results, and very good reproducability.
None of which involve latency-prone GUI applications running on cheap commodity hardware though. I listed examples where mainline seems to behave sub-optimal and ways to reproduce them but this doesn't seem to be an area of interest.
| |