Willy Tarreau wrote:
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 09:31:33PM -0700, Li, Tong N wrote:
Willy,
These are all good comments. Regarding the cache penalty, I've done some
measurements using benchmarks like SPEC OMP on an 8-processor SMP and
the performance with this patch was nearly identical to that
Willy Tarreau wrote:
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 09:31:33PM -0700, Li, Tong N wrote:
Willy,
These are all good comments. Regarding the cache penalty, I've done some
measurements using benchmarks like SPEC OMP on an 8-processor SMP and
the performance with this patch was nearly identical to that
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 09:31:33PM -0700, Li, Tong N wrote:
> Willy,
>
> These are all good comments. Regarding the cache penalty, I've done some
> measurements using benchmarks like SPEC OMP on an 8-processor SMP and
> the performance with this patch was nearly identical to that with the
>
Jesse; William Lee Irwin
III;
> Bill Huey (hui); [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Nick Piggin;
Bill
> Davidsen; John Kingman; Peter Williams; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [RFC] Extend Linux to support proportional-share
scheduling
>
> Hi Tong,
>
> On Tue, Jun 05, 200
Hi Tong,
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 06:56:17PM -0700, Li, Tong N wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've ported my code to mainline 2.6.21.3. You can get it at
> http://www.cs.duke.edu/~tongli/linux/.
as much as possible, you should post your patch for others to comment
on it. Posting just a URL is often fine
Hi all,
I've ported my code to mainline 2.6.21.3. You can get it at
http://www.cs.duke.edu/~tongli/linux/. As I said before, the intent of
the patch is not to compete with CFS and SD because the design relies on
the underlying scheduler for interactive performance. The goal here is
to present a
Hi all,
I've ported my code to mainline 2.6.21.3. You can get it at
http://www.cs.duke.edu/~tongli/linux/. As I said before, the intent of
the patch is not to compete with CFS and SD because the design relies on
the underlying scheduler for interactive performance. The goal here is
to present a
Hi Tong,
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 06:56:17PM -0700, Li, Tong N wrote:
Hi all,
I've ported my code to mainline 2.6.21.3. You can get it at
http://www.cs.duke.edu/~tongli/linux/.
as much as possible, you should post your patch for others to comment
on it. Posting just a URL is often fine to
III;
Bill Huey (hui); [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Nick Piggin;
Bill
Davidsen; John Kingman; Peter Williams; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [RFC] Extend Linux to support proportional-share
scheduling
Hi Tong,
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 06:56:17PM -0700, Li, Tong N wrote:
Hi all
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 09:31:33PM -0700, Li, Tong N wrote:
Willy,
These are all good comments. Regarding the cache penalty, I've done some
measurements using benchmarks like SPEC OMP on an 8-processor SMP and
the performance with this patch was nearly identical to that with the
mainline.
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 11:30:04AM -0700, Tong Li wrote:
> This patch extends the existing Linux scheduler with support for
> proportional-share scheduling (as a new KConfig option).
> http://www.cs.duke.edu/~tongli/linux/linux-2.6.19.2-trio.patch
> It uses a scheduling algorithm, called
This patch extends the existing Linux scheduler with support for
proportional-share scheduling (as a new KConfig option).
http://www.cs.duke.edu/~tongli/linux/linux-2.6.19.2-trio.patch
It uses a scheduling algorithm, called Distributed Weighted Round-Robin
(DWRR), which retains the existing
This patch extends the existing Linux scheduler with support for
proportional-share scheduling (as a new KConfig option).
http://www.cs.duke.edu/~tongli/linux/linux-2.6.19.2-trio.patch
It uses a scheduling algorithm, called Distributed Weighted Round-Robin
(DWRR), which retains the existing
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 11:30:04AM -0700, Tong Li wrote:
This patch extends the existing Linux scheduler with support for
proportional-share scheduling (as a new KConfig option).
http://www.cs.duke.edu/~tongli/linux/linux-2.6.19.2-trio.patch
It uses a scheduling algorithm, called Distributed
14 matches
Mail list logo
