On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 20:31 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Fri, 22 Jul 2005, Lee Revell wrote: > > > > Con's interactivity benchmark looks quite promising for finding > > scheduler related interactivity regressions. > > I doubt that _any_ of the regressions that are user-visible are > scheduler-related. They all tend to be disk IO issues (bad scheduling or > just plain bad drivers), and then sometimes just VM misbehaviour. > > People are looking at all these RT patches, when the thing is that most > nobody will ever be able to tell the difference between 10us and 1ms > latencies unless it causes a skip in audio.
I agree re: the RT patches, but what makes Con's benchmark useful is that it also tests interactivity (measuring in msecs vs. usecs) with everything running SCHED_NORMAL, which is a much better approximation of a desktop load. And the numbers do go well up into the range where people would notice, tens and hundreds of ms. Lee - 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/
