Re: [interbench numbers] Re: interactive task starvation

Con Kolivas
2006-03-24T00:21:27Z

On Thursday 23 March 2006 22:07, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> Nothing conclusive. Some of the difference may be because interbench
> has a dependency on the idle sleep path popping tasks in a prio 16
> instead of 18. Some of it may be because I'm not restricting IO, doing
> that makes a bit of difference. Some of it is definitely plain old
> jitter.

Thanks for those! Just a clarification please

> virgin

I assume 2.6.16-rc6-mm2 ?

> throttle patches with throttling disabled

With your full patchset but no throttling enabled?

> minus idle sleep

Full patchset -throttling-idlesleep ?

> minus don't restrict IO

Full patchset -throttling-idlesleep-restrictio ?

Can you please email the latest separate patches so we can see them in
isolation? I promise I won't ask for any more interbench numbers any time
soon :)

Thanks!

Cheers,
Con