From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965805AbXC1XEj (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Mar 2007 19:04:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965810AbXC1XEi (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Mar 2007 19:04:38 -0400 Received: from mail20.syd.optusnet.com.au ([211.29.132.201]:36384 "EHLO mail20.syd.optusnet.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965805AbXC1XEg (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Mar 2007 19:04:36 -0400 From: Con Kolivas To: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: staircase deadline misc fixes Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 09:44:45 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 Cc: linux list , Andrew Morton , ck list References: <200703290237.38777.kernel@kolivas.org> <20070328184843.GA17420@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: <20070328184843.GA17420@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200703290944.45888.kernel@kolivas.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 29 March 2007 04:48, Ingo Molnar wrote: > hm, how about the questions Mike raised (there were a couple of cases of > friction between 'the design as documented and announced' and 'the code > as implemented')? As far as i saw they were still largely unanswered - > but let me know if they are all answered and addressed: I spent less time emailing and more time coding. I have been working on addressing whatever people brought up. > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=117465220309006&w=2 Attended to. > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=117489673929124&w=2 Attended to. > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=117489831930240&w=2 Checked fine. > and the numbers he posted: > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=117448900626028&w=2 Attended to. > his test conclusion was that under CPU load, RSDL (SD) generally does > not hold up to mainline's interactivity. There have been improvements since the earlier iterations but it's still a fairness based design. Mike's "sticking point" test case should be improved as well. My call based on my own testing and feedback from users is: Under niced loads it is 99% in favour of SD. Under light loads it is 95% in favour of SD. Under Heavy loads it becomes proportionately in favour of mainline. The crossover is somewhere around a load of 4. If the reluctance to renice X goes away I'd say it was 99% across the board and to much higher loads. > Ingo -- -ck