From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750778AbVHUEWg (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Aug 2005 00:22:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750783AbVHUEWg (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Aug 2005 00:22:36 -0400 Received: from mail13.syd.optusnet.com.au ([211.29.132.194]:16801 "EHLO mail13.syd.optusnet.com.au") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750778AbVHUEWg (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Aug 2005 00:22:36 -0400 From: Con Kolivas To: Michal Piotrowski Subject: Re: Schedulers benchmark - Was: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] PlugSched-5.2.4 for 2.6.12 and 2.6.13-rc6 Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 14:22:16 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 Cc: LKML References: <43001E18.8020707@bigpond.net.au> <200508211147.39503.kernel@kolivas.org> <6bffcb0e050820211645c31a7@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <6bffcb0e050820211645c31a7@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200508211422.16850.kernel@kolivas.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 14:16, Michal Piotrowski wrote: > Hi, > > On 8/21/05, Con Kolivas wrote: > > On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 11:34, Michal Piotrowski wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Hi > > > > > here are kernbench results: > > > > Nice to see you using kernbench :) > > > > > ./kernbench -M -o 128 > > > [..] > > > Average Optimal -j 128 Load Run: > > > > Was there any reason you chose 128? Optimal usually works out > > automatically from kernbench to 4x number_cpus. If I recall correctly you > > have 4 cpus? Not sure what 128 represents. > > > > Cheers, > > Con > > No, I just have 1 pentium 4 with ht ;). > > Why I chose 128? I just want very high loads. Now I'll try -j192 and > -j256, but I don't know how does my system survive it. Well it will survive all right, but eventually get into swap thrash territory and that's not a meaningful cpu scheduler benchmark. Cheers, Con