From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264741AbTGBGG2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jul 2003 02:06:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264753AbTGBGG2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jul 2003 02:06:28 -0400 Received: from c17870.thoms1.vic.optusnet.com.au ([210.49.248.224]:44432 "EHLO mail.kolivas.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264741AbTGBGGZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jul 2003 02:06:25 -0400 From: Con Kolivas To: Roberto Orenstein , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] O1int with contest Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 16:24:32 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.2 References: <1057120014.7919.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1057120014.7919.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200307021624.32749.kernel@kolivas.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2 Jul 2003 14:26, Roberto Orenstein wrote: > Hi guys, > > Here are some numbers from three kernels tested on my home machine. > All threes are 2.5.73 based. > Vanilla is a plain one, O1int-0307020011 is the latest (as I last > checked) O1int patch w/o the granularity patch, and > O1int-granu-0307020011 is the former with granularity. Thanks for doing these. > One can see that with granularity, the kernel compile suffers a bit, but > the response is usually high. In my machine, this was the kernel with > the best responsiveness. Can you please describe your experiences? The more feedback I get the more I can get it working well. > Each kernel was run once, except O1int-0307020011 with three iterations. > This was the first I tested, and as soon I noticed the time it took, I > decided to run once the others 8). Maybe this has some bad influence on > the results. I appreciate any comments... Ok well here is my summary of the situation. My patch has virtually no effect on contest results (except perhaps io_other). This is good because my earlier attempts did affect it, and possibly starved some of the loads. Dare I say it, contest is not very good at picking up _these_ sort of scheduler tweaks unless they do something wrong. Sorry if my system responsiveness benchmark doesn't show this effect; I think they're different. This is more about picking the right thing to give preference to. There's a long discussion in that, but I'll try not to get into it. By the way it doesn't look like your dbench in dbench load actually worked. O1int still remains a work in progress. Con