From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750794AbVHUEtr (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Aug 2005 00:49:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750799AbVHUEtr (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Aug 2005 00:49:47 -0400 Received: from mail08.syd.optusnet.com.au ([211.29.132.189]:25255 "EHLO mail08.syd.optusnet.com.au") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750794AbVHUEtq (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Aug 2005 00:49:46 -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 14:49:38 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 Cc: LKML References: <43001E18.8020707@bigpond.net.au> <200508211422.16850.kernel@kolivas.org> <6bffcb0e05082021446aeb8004@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <6bffcb0e05082021446aeb8004@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200508211449.38871.kernel@kolivas.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 14:44, Michal Piotrowski wrote: > On 8/21/05, Con Kolivas wrote: > > Well it will survive all right, but eventually get into swap thrash > > territory and that's not a meaningful cpu scheduler benchmark. > > > > Cheers, > > Con > > Ok. How about make -j? It's one of kernbench test runs, on my box load > average > 1500 ;). Just do that if you wish to overload the system. It's a vm benchmark. No doubt the cpu scheduler contributes to how the vm behaves, but it isn't a primary cpu scheduler test. > BTW I have only 1 gb ram, so high values of -j are road to hell for my > system... I'm still learning, but it's fun ;). Now I'll try your latest > -ck. Thanks for "1Gb Low Memory Support". You're welcome, Con