[test] sched: SD-latest versus Mike's latest

Ingo Molnar
2007-04-05T11:55:09Z

* Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> wrote:

> On Tue, 2007-04-03 at 08:01 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > looks interesting - could you send the patch?
>
> Ok, this is looking/feeling pretty good in testing. Comments on
> fugliness etc much appreciated.
>
> Below the numbers is a snapshot of my experimental tree. It's a
> mixture of my old throttling/anti-starvation tree and the task
> promotion patch, with the addition of a scheduling class for
> interactive tasks to dish out some of that targeted unfairness I
> mentioned.

here's some test results, comparing SD-latest to Mike's-latest:

re-testing the weak points of the vanilla scheduler + Mike's:

- thud.c: this workload has almost unnoticeable effect
- fiftyp.c: noticeable, but alot better than previously!

re-testing the weak points of SD:

- hackbench: still unusable under such type of high load - no improvement.
- make -j: still less interactive than Mike's - no improvement.

Ingo