From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
To: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
Cc: linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
ck list <ck@vds.kolivas.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: rr_interval experiments
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 05:11:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070420031140.GA8633@wotan.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200704201047.57539.kernel@kolivas.org>
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:47:57AM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Friday 20 April 2007 01:01, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > This then allows the maximum rr_interval to be as large as 5000
> > milliseconds.
>
> Just for fun, on a core2duo make allnoconfig make -j8 here are the build time
> differences (on a 1000HZ config) machine:
>
> 16ms:
> 53.68user 4.81system 0:34.27elapsed 170%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
>
> 1ms:
> 56.73user 4.83system 0:36.03elapsed 170%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
>
> 5000ms:
> 52.88user 4.77system 0:32.37elapsed 178%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
>
> For the record, 16ms is what SD v0.43 would choose as the default value on
> this hardware. A load with a much lower natural context switching rate than a
> kernel compile, as you said Nick, would show even greater discrepancy in
> these results.
>
> Fun eh? Note these are not for any comparison with anything else; just to show
> the effect rr_interval changes have on throughput.
Yeah very interesting, thanks. I was sure that a more modern CPU and/or
one with more cache (in this case, both!) would show bigger differences
even on kbuild.
In this case, 16ms -> infinite results in almost 6% performance
improvement.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-20 3:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-04-19 15:01 [PATCH] [1/3] sched: implement staircase deadline scheduler timeslice fixes Con Kolivas
2007-04-20 0:47 ` rr_interval experiments Con Kolivas
2007-04-20 3:11 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070420031140.GA8633@wotan.suse.de \
--to=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=ck@vds.kolivas.org \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.