Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Am Dienstag 12 Juni 2007 schrieb Miguel Figueiredo:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> some results based on massing_intr.c by Satoru, can be found on
>> http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/tools/massive_intr.c
>
> Hi Miquel, Ingo, Con!
>
[...]
> Any suggestions?
I read
Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Am Dienstag 12 Juni 2007 schrieb Miguel Figueiredo:
Hi all,
some results based on massing_intr.c by Satoru, can be found on
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/tools/massive_intr.c
Hi Miquel, Ingo, Con!
[...]
Any suggestions?
I read somewhere in the
Hi,
I did run massive_intr.c for 60 secs with increasing nproc (
10,20,30,40,50,60) waiting for effects.
Below a small table of the results
2.6.21.1-cfs-v16
nproc , usability result
10 , serious frame drops , Firefox hardly recognizes clicked links,
but still usable
20 - 30, usability
Hi,
I did run massive_intr.c for 60 secs with increasing nproc (
10,20,30,40,50,60) waiting for effects.
Below a small table of the results
2.6.21.1-cfs-v16
nproc , usability result
10 , serious frame drops , Firefox hardly recognizes clicked links,
but still usable
20 - 30, usability
call for more SD versus CFS comparisons (was: Re:
> [ck] Mainline plans)
>
> > -Message d'origine-
> > De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de Miguel
> > Figueiredo Envoyé : 11 juin 2007 20:30
> >
> > Hi all,
>
> -Message d'origine-
> De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de
> Miguel Figueiredo
> Envoyé : 11 juin 2007 20:30
>
> Hi all,
>
> some results based on massing_intr.c by Satoru, can be found
> on
Am Dienstag 12 Juni 2007 schrieb Miguel Figueiredo:
> Hi all,
>
> some results based on massing_intr.c by Satoru, can be found on
> http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/tools/massive_intr.c
Hi Miquel, Ingo, Con!
I have been a week without internet access. I have been testing 2.6.21.3 +
* Tobias Gerschner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The output of massive_intr can be found here :
> http://www.yoper.com/scheduler-test/
here's the spread of the massive_intr results (the average 'jitter' of
the second column of the results - lower values are indicating more
stable / more fair
* Con Kolivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So unless there's a vm issue (which does not appear to be the case) I
> can't see how any of these will change Tobias' extensive testing
> results.
yep - i've retested with -ck2 and cannot reproduce his results. So i'm
waiting for his feedback to
On Tuesday 12 June 2007 18:57, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * Tobias Gerschner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I did run massive_intr.c for 60 secs with increasing nproc (
> > > 10,20,30,40,50,60) waiting for effects.
> > >
> > > Below a small table of the
* Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Tobias Gerschner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I did run massive_intr.c for 60 secs with increasing nproc (
> > 10,20,30,40,50,60) waiting for effects.
> >
> > Below a small table of the results
> >
> > 2.6.21.1-cfs-v16
> >
> > nproc ,
* Tobias Gerschner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> it's a peacock freeliner xp II. Close to 5 year old Laptop with an
> Athlon XP 2600+ using 1 GB of RAM / no swap enabled.
>
> The other information will be sent as soon as I am back at work .
thanks! Here's another thing that would be worth
2007/6/12, Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
* Tobias Gerschner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I did run massive_intr.c for 60 secs with increasing nproc (
> 10,20,30,40,50,60) waiting for effects.
>
> Below a small table of the results
>
> 2.6.21.1-cfs-v16
>
> nproc , usability result
>
> 10 ,
* Tobias Gerschner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I did run massive_intr.c for 60 secs with increasing nproc (
> 10,20,30,40,50,60) waiting for effects.
>
> Below a small table of the results
>
> 2.6.21.1-cfs-v16
>
> nproc , usability result
>
> 10 , serious frame drops , Firefox hardly
2007/6/12, Miguel Figueiredo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi all,
some results based on massing_intr.c by Satoru, can be found on
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/tools/massive_intr.c
2007/6/12, Miguel Figueiredo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi all,
some results based on massing_intr.c by
2007/6/12, Miguel Figueiredo [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi all,
some results based on massing_intr.c by Satoru, can be found on
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/tools/massive_intr.c
2007/6/12, Miguel Figueiredo [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi all,
some results based on massing_intr.c by Satoru,
* Tobias Gerschner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I did run massive_intr.c for 60 secs with increasing nproc (
10,20,30,40,50,60) waiting for effects.
Below a small table of the results
2.6.21.1-cfs-v16
nproc , usability result
10 , serious frame drops , Firefox hardly recognizes
2007/6/12, Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
* Tobias Gerschner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I did run massive_intr.c for 60 secs with increasing nproc (
10,20,30,40,50,60) waiting for effects.
Below a small table of the results
2.6.21.1-cfs-v16
nproc , usability result
10 , serious frame
* Tobias Gerschner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
it's a peacock freeliner xp II. Close to 5 year old Laptop with an
Athlon XP 2600+ using 1 GB of RAM / no swap enabled.
The other information will be sent as soon as I am back at work .
thanks! Here's another thing that would be worth testing:
* Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Tobias Gerschner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I did run massive_intr.c for 60 secs with increasing nproc (
10,20,30,40,50,60) waiting for effects.
Below a small table of the results
2.6.21.1-cfs-v16
nproc , usability result
10 ,
On Tuesday 12 June 2007 18:57, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Tobias Gerschner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I did run massive_intr.c for 60 secs with increasing nproc (
10,20,30,40,50,60) waiting for effects.
Below a small table of the results
Nice results.
* Con Kolivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So unless there's a vm issue (which does not appear to be the case) I
can't see how any of these will change Tobias' extensive testing
results.
yep - i've retested with -ck2 and cannot reproduce his results. So i'm
waiting for his feedback to see why
* Tobias Gerschner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The output of massive_intr can be found here :
http://www.yoper.com/scheduler-test/
here's the spread of the massive_intr results (the average 'jitter' of
the second column of the results - lower values are indicating more
stable / more fair
Am Dienstag 12 Juni 2007 schrieb Miguel Figueiredo:
Hi all,
some results based on massing_intr.c by Satoru, can be found on
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/tools/massive_intr.c
Hi Miquel, Ingo, Con!
I have been a week without internet access. I have been testing 2.6.21.3 +
sws2
-Message d'origine-
De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de
Miguel Figueiredo
Envoyé : 11 juin 2007 20:30
Hi all,
some results based on massing_intr.c by Satoru, can be found
on http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/tools/massive_intr.c
I
-Message d'origine-
De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de
Fortier,Vincent [Montreal]
Envoyé : 12 juin 2007 21:36
À : Miguel Figueiredo; linux kernel mailing list; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc : Con Kolivas; Ingo Molnar
Objet : RE: call for more SD versus CFS
Hi all,
some results based on massing_intr.c by Satoru, can be found on
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/tools/massive_intr.c
Runned several times like:
$ massing_intr 5 2 >> results-kernel-5.2
$ massing_intr 300 300 >> results-kernel-300.300
To calculate average and standard
Hi all,
some results based on massing_intr.c by Satoru, can be found on
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/tools/massive_intr.c
Runned several times like:
$ massing_intr 5 2 results-kernel-5.2
$ massing_intr 300 300 results-kernel-300.300
To calculate average and standard deviation:
28 matches
Mail list logo
