From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
To: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
Cc: linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
ck list <ck@vds.kolivas.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: rr_interval experiments
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 05:11:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070420031140.GA8633@wotan.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200704201047.57539.kernel@kolivas.org>
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:47:57AM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Friday 20 April 2007 01:01, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > This then allows the maximum rr_interval to be as large as 5000
> > milliseconds.
>
> Just for fun, on a core2duo make allnoconfig make -j8 here are the build time
> differences (on a 1000HZ config) machine:
>
> 16ms:
> 53.68user 4.81system 0:34.27elapsed 170%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
>
> 1ms:
> 56.73user 4.83system 0:36.03elapsed 170%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
>
> 5000ms:
> 52.88user 4.77system 0:32.37elapsed 178%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
>
> For the record, 16ms is what SD v0.43 would choose as the default value on
> this hardware. A load with a much lower natural context switching rate than a
> kernel compile, as you said Nick, would show even greater discrepancy in
> these results.
>
> Fun eh? Note these are not for any comparison with anything else; just to show
> the effect rr_interval changes have on throughput.
Yeah very interesting, thanks. I was sure that a more modern CPU and/or
one with more cache (in this case, both!) would show bigger differences
even on kbuild.
In this case, 16ms -> infinite results in almost 6% performance
improvement.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-20 3:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-04-19 15:01 [PATCH] [1/3] sched: implement staircase deadline scheduler timeslice fixes Con Kolivas
2007-04-20 0:47 ` rr_interval experiments Con Kolivas
2007-04-20 3:11 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070420031140.GA8633@wotan.suse.de \
--to=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=ck@vds.kolivas.org \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox