Re: [BENCHMARK] scheduler tunables with contest - exit_weight

[Con Kolivas <conman@kolivas.net>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, 26 Dec 2002 12:24 am, Denis Vlasenko wrote:
> On 21 December 2002 19:18, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > osdl hardware, contest results, 2.5.52-mm2 with scheduler tunable -
> > exit weight (ew1= exit weight ==1 and so on)
> >
> > io_load:
> > Kernel [runs]           Time    CPU%    Loads   LCPU%   Ratio
> > ew0 [5]                 105.3   90      16      22      2.91
> > ew1 [5]                 86.4    97      12      18      2.39
> > ew2 [5]                 74.9    109     9       18      2.07
> > ew3 [5]                 84.2    100     11      19      2.33
> > ew4 [5]                 83.8    102     10      18      2.31
> > ew5 [5]                 89.9    93      12      20      2.48
> > ew6 [5]                 97.5    88      13      20      2.69
> > ew7 [5]                 89.2    95      12      20      2.46
>
> In spite of worrying reports of decreasing single task performance,
> does it make sense to add "null_load" test? ;)

I've simplified the data. There is no significant difference in the no_load 
groups with changes to the scheduler tunables over useful ranges. 

Con
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+CXyRF6dfvkL3i1gRAtSyAJ9XThpp5iCI1FcjDxVOESbm5ialywCgg7Vb
HN+jWurjIwXngqCUOmDWhh0=
=7Iy8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----