Re: [test] hackbench.c interactivity results: vanilla versus SD/RSDL

Mike Galbraith
2007-03-31T03:42:41Z

On Sat, 2007-03-31 at 05:23 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 19:36 -0700, Xenofon Antidides wrote:
>
> > Something different on many cpus? Sorry I was thinking
> > something other. I try 50% run + 50% sleep on one cpu
> > and mainline has big problem. Sorry for bad code I
> > copy bits to make it work. Start program first then
> > run bash 100% cpu (while : ; do : ; done). Try change
> > program forks from 1 till 3 or more mainline kernel
> > and bash gets 0%.
>
> top - 05:16:41 up 43 min, 13 users, load average: 9.51, 4.32, 5.67
>
> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ P COMMAND
> 7146 root 15 0 1564 104 24 R 43 0.0 0:20.74 0 fiftypercent
> 7142 root 15 0 1564 104 24 S 37 0.0 0:18.08 0 fiftypercent
> 7140 root 15 0 1564 436 356 R 21 0.0 0:18.94 1 fiftypercent
> 7144 root 15 0 1564 104 24 R 21 0.0 0:18.75 1 fiftypercent
> 7143 root 15 0 1564 104 24 R 20 0.0 0:18.85 1 fiftypercent
> 7145 root 15 0 1564 104 24 R 19 0.0 0:18.30 1 fiftypercent
> 7147 root 15 0 1564 104 24 R 19 0.0 0:18.03 1 fiftypercent
> 7141 root 16 0 1564 104 24 R 10 0.0 0:18.29 0 fiftypercent
> 6245 root 16 0 3368 1876 1376 R 7 0.2 0:49.81 0 bash
>
> That's mainline with the below (which I'm trying various ideas to improve).

Note: that's not an sh -c started at the same time as the 50% duty cycle
dos, the pertinent data is that bash is getting into the loop.

Yesterday, I piddled around with tracking interactive backlog as a way
to detect when the load isn't really an interactive load, that's very
simple and has potential.

-Mike