[test] sched: SD-latest versus Mike's latest

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> wrote:

> On Tue, 2007-04-03 at 08:01 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> > looks interesting - could you send the patch?
> 
> Ok, this is looking/feeling pretty good in testing.  Comments on 
> fugliness etc much appreciated.
>
> Below the numbers is a snapshot of my experimental tree.  It's a 
> mixture of my old throttling/anti-starvation tree and the task 
> promotion patch, with the addition of a scheduling class for 
> interactive tasks to dish out some of that targeted unfairness I 
> mentioned.

here's some test results, comparing SD-latest to Mike's-latest:

re-testing the weak points of the vanilla scheduler + Mike's:

 - thud.c:    this workload has almost unnoticeable effect
 - fiftyp.c:  noticeable, but alot better than previously!

re-testing the weak points of SD:

 - hackbench: still unusable under such type of high load - no improvement.
 - make -j:   still less interactive than Mike's - no improvement.

	Ingo