On Wednesday 18 April 2007 22:14, Nick Piggin wrote: > 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?
I said I wasn't pursuing it but since you're offering, the rc6 patch should apply ok. http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/staircase-deadline/2.6.21-rc6-sd-0.40.patch -- -ck - 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/