On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 07:33:56PM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote: > On Wednesday 18 April 2007 18:55, Nick Piggin wrote: > > Again, for comparison 2.6.21-rc7 mainline: > > > > 508.87user 32.47system 2:17.82elapsed 392%CPU > > 509.05user 32.25system 2:17.84elapsed 392%CPU > > 508.75user 32.26system 2:17.83elapsed 392%CPU > > 508.63user 32.17system 2:17.88elapsed 392%CPU > > 509.01user 32.26system 2:17.90elapsed 392%CPU > > 509.08user 32.20system 2:17.95elapsed 392%CPU > > > > So looking at elapsed time, a granularity of 100ms is just behind the > > mainline score. However it is using slightly less user time and > > slightly more idle time, which indicates that balancing might have got > > a bit less aggressive. > > > > But anyway, it conclusively shows the efficiency impact of such tiny > > timeslices. > > See test.kernel.org for how (the now defunct) SD was performing on kernbench. > It had low latency _and_ equivalent throughput to mainline. Set the standard > appropriately on both counts please.
I can give it a run. Got an updated patch against -rc7? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/