From: Miguel Figueiredo <elmig@debianpt.org>
To: Martin Steigerwald <Martin@lichtvoll.de>
Cc: ck@vds.kolivas.org,
linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: call for more SD versus CFS comparisons (was: Re: [ck] Mainline plans)
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 22:19:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4673026F.8070406@debianpt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200706121852.58161.Martin@lichtvoll.de>
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 list that X itself makes lots of hocus pocus
that affect the behavior of programs running inside X itself (i even
read about X's own scheduling - someone can confirm/deny it? - and evil
behavior on drivers).
If we look/test a fair/responsive scheduler isn't better to test it
outside X?
IMHO, X itself, it's too complex and may obscure our tests on
fairness/interactivity.
Anyone knows any good tests for interctivity?
[...]
--
Com os melhores cumprimentos/Best regards,
Miguel Figueiredo
http://www.DebianPT.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-06-15 21:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-06-12 0:30 call for more SD versus CFS comparisons (was: Re: [ck] Mainline plans) Miguel Figueiredo
2007-06-12 7:39 ` Tobias Gerschner
2007-06-12 8:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-12 8:51 ` Tobias Gerschner
2007-06-12 8:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-12 8:57 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-12 10:33 ` Con Kolivas
2007-06-12 10:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-12 14:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-12 16:52 ` Martin Steigerwald
2007-06-15 21:19 ` Miguel Figueiredo [this message]
2007-06-13 1:36 ` Fortier,Vincent [Montreal]
2007-06-13 1:54 ` Fortier,Vincent [Montreal]
2007-06-14 7:56 ` call for more SD versus CFS comparisons (was: " Jarek Poplawski
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-06-14 10:10 call for more SD versus CFS comparisons (was: Re: [ck] " Tobias Gerschner
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=4673026F.8070406@debianpt.org \
--to=elmig@debianpt.org \
--cc=Martin@lichtvoll.de \
--cc=ck@vds.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.