From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
To: Miguel Figueiredo <elmig@debianpt.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel M/L <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Sched - graphic smoothness under load - cfs-v13 sd-0.48
Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 13:22:09 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <465326C1.6070904@tmr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4650774F.9040208@debianpt.org>
Miguel Figueiredo wrote:
> Bill Davidsen wrote:
>> I generated a table of results from the latest glitch1 script, using
>> an HTML postprocessor I not *quite* ready to foist on the word. In
>> any case it has some numbers for frames per second, fairness of the
>> processor time allocated to the compute bound processes which
>> generate a lot of other screen activity for X, and my subjective
>> comments on how smooth it looked and felt.
>>
>> The chart is at http://www.tmr.com/~davidsen/sched_smooth_01.html for
>> your viewing pleasure. The only "tuned" result was with sd, since
>> what I observed was so bad using the default settings. If any
>> scheduler developers would like me to try other tunings or new
>> versions let me know.
>>
>
> As I tryied myself kernels 2.6.21, 2.6.21-cfs-v13, and 2.6.21-ck2 on
> the same machine i found *very* odd those numbers you posted, so i
> tested myself those kernels to see the numbers I get instead of
> talking about the usage of kernel xpto feels like.
>
> I did run glxgears with kernels 2.6.21, 2.6.21-cfs-v13 and 2.6.21-ck2
> inside Debian's GNOME environment. The hardware is an AMD Sempron64
> 3.0 GHz, 1 GB RAM, Nvidia 6800XT.
> Average and standard deviation from the gathered data:
>
> * 2.6.21: average = 11251.1; stdev = 0.172
> * 2.6.21-cfs-v13: average = 11242.8; stdev = 0.033
> * 2.6.21-ck2: average = 11257.8; stdev = 0.067
>
> Keep in mind those numbers don't mean anything we all know glxgears is
> not a benchmark, their purpose is only to be used as comparison under
> the same conditions.
>
> One odd thing i noticed, with 2.6.21-cfs-v13 the gnome's time applet
> in the bar skipped some minutes (e.g. 16:23 -> 16:25) several times.
>
> The data is available on:
> http://www.debianPT.org/~elmig/pool/kernel/20070520/
>
>
> How did you get your data? I am affraid your data it's wrong, there's
> no such big difference between the schedulers...
>
The glitch1 script starts multiple scrolling xterms at the same time as
the glxgears, and allows observation of smoothness of the gears. It's
not a benchmark, although the fps is reported since fast or slow and
scheduler with "fair" aspirations should have similar results in 5 sec
time slices, and between multiple CPU-bound xterms scrolling with the
same code. The comments column can be used to report the user
impressions, since that's the important thing if you want to listen to
music or watch video.
Perhaps my data appear "wrong" because you have failed to measure the
same thing?
You can get the most recent info at http://www.tmr.com/~public/source/
if you want to duplicate the test on your hardware, or view the most
recent tests at http://www.tmr.com/~davidsen/sched_smooth_03.html to see
what the data look like when you run the same test.
Note: there have been some minor changes in the test and analysis
resulting from suggestions, only the recent results are worth investigating.
--
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
CTO TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-22 17:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-05-19 20:02 Sched - graphic smoothness under load - cfs-v13 sd-0.48 Bill Davidsen
2007-05-19 20:22 ` Ray Lee
2007-05-20 0:44 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-05-20 6:12 ` Michael Gerdau
2007-05-20 6:30 ` Ray Lee
2007-05-20 6:59 ` Michael Gerdau
2007-05-20 7:20 ` Ray Lee
2007-05-20 6:55 ` Ray Lee
2007-05-21 18:27 ` Matt Keenan
2007-05-19 20:36 ` Diego Calleja
2007-05-19 20:55 ` Ray Lee
2007-05-19 23:21 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-05-20 16:29 ` Miguel Figueiredo
2007-05-20 16:44 ` Ray Lee
2007-05-20 16:58 ` Miguel Figueiredo
2007-05-20 17:19 ` Ray Lee
2007-05-22 17:55 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-05-22 20:01 ` Miguel Figueiredo
2007-05-23 0:28 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-05-23 13:10 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-05-23 18:29 ` Miguel Figueiredo
2007-05-23 20:45 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-05-23 21:03 ` Miguel Figueiredo
2007-05-24 0:36 ` Con Kolivas
2007-05-23 4:06 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-23 5:23 ` Michael Gerdau
2007-05-23 7:58 ` Xavier Bestel
2007-05-23 8:21 ` Bill Huey
2007-05-23 18:22 ` Ian Romanick
2007-05-23 18:43 ` Xavier Bestel
2007-05-23 17:22 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-05-23 16:59 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-05-22 17:22 ` Bill Davidsen [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=465326C1.6070904@tmr.com \
--to=davidsen@tmr.com \
--cc=elmig@debianpt.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