From: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Cc: Alejandro Bonilla <abonilla@linuxwireless.org>,
Blaisorblade <blaisorblade@yahoo.it>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: Giving developers clue how many testers verified certain kernel version
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:34:18 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1122089660.6510.29.camel@mindpipe> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0507222029200.6074@g5.osdl.org>
On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 20:31 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Fri, 22 Jul 2005, Lee Revell wrote:
> >
> > Con's interactivity benchmark looks quite promising for finding
> > scheduler related interactivity regressions.
>
> I doubt that _any_ of the regressions that are user-visible are
> scheduler-related. They all tend to be disk IO issues (bad scheduling or
> just plain bad drivers), and then sometimes just VM misbehaviour.
>
> People are looking at all these RT patches, when the thing is that most
> nobody will ever be able to tell the difference between 10us and 1ms
> latencies unless it causes a skip in audio.
I agree re: the RT patches, but what makes Con's benchmark useful is
that it also tests interactivity (measuring in msecs vs. usecs) with
everything running SCHED_NORMAL, which is a much better approximation of
a desktop load. And the numbers do go well up into the range where
people would notice, tens and hundreds of ms.
Lee
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-07-23 3:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-07-23 0:44 Giving developers clue how many testers verified certain kernel version Blaisorblade
2005-07-23 0:50 ` David Lang
2005-07-23 0:59 ` H. Peter Anvin
2005-07-23 1:07 ` Alejandro Bonilla
2005-07-23 3:09 ` Lee Revell
2005-07-23 2:15 ` Alejandro Bonilla
2005-07-23 3:21 ` Lee Revell
2005-07-23 2:34 ` Alejandro Bonilla
2005-07-23 3:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-07-23 2:40 ` Alejandro Bonilla
2005-07-23 3:34 ` Lee Revell [this message]
2005-07-23 9:05 ` Con Kolivas
2005-07-23 16:45 ` Lee Revell
2005-07-23 5:34 ` Giving developers clue how many testers verifiedcertain " Al Boldi
2005-07-23 3:56 ` Giving developers clue how many testers verified certain " Adrian Bunk
2005-07-23 9:21 ` Jesper Krogh
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-07-22 1:34 Martin MOKREJŠ
2005-07-22 2:10 ` Mark Nipper
2005-07-22 2:38 ` Martin MOKREJŠ
2005-07-22 2:40 ` Alejandro Bonilla
2005-07-22 23:22 ` Adrian Bunk
2005-07-22 23:11 ` Adrian Bunk
2005-07-24 18:45 ` Martin MOKREJŠ
2005-07-24 18:54 ` Adrian Bunk
2005-07-24 19:10 ` Martin MOKREJŠ
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=1122089660.6510.29.camel@mindpipe \
--to=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
--cc=abonilla@linuxwireless.org \
--cc=blaisorblade@yahoo.it \
--cc=bunk@stusta.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox