From: Miguel Figueiredo <elmig@debianpt.org>
To: Martin Steigerwald <Martin@lichtvoll.de>
Cc: ck@vds.kolivas.org,
linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: call for more SD versus CFS comparisons (was: Re: [ck] Mainline plans)
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 22:19:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4673026F.8070406@debianpt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200706121852.58161.Martin@lichtvoll.de>
Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Am Dienstag 12 Juni 2007 schrieb Miguel Figueiredo:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> some results based on massing_intr.c by Satoru, can be found on
>> http://people.redhat.com/mingo/cfs-scheduler/tools/massive_intr.c
>
> Hi Miquel, Ingo, Con!
>
[...]
> Any suggestions?
I read somewhere in the list that X itself makes lots of hocus pocus
that affect the behavior of programs running inside X itself (i even
read about X's own scheduling - someone can confirm/deny it? - and evil
behavior on drivers).
If we look/test a fair/responsive scheduler isn't better to test it
outside X?
IMHO, X itself, it's too complex and may obscure our tests on
fairness/interactivity.
Anyone knows any good tests for interctivity?
[...]
--
Com os melhores cumprimentos/Best regards,
Miguel Figueiredo
http://www.DebianPT.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-06-15 21:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-06-12 0:30 call for more SD versus CFS comparisons (was: Re: [ck] Mainline plans) Miguel Figueiredo
2007-06-12 7:39 ` Tobias Gerschner
2007-06-12 8:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-12 8:51 ` Tobias Gerschner
2007-06-12 8:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-12 8:57 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-12 10:33 ` Con Kolivas
2007-06-12 10:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-12 14:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-12 16:52 ` Martin Steigerwald
2007-06-15 21:19 ` Miguel Figueiredo [this message]
2007-06-13 1:36 ` Fortier,Vincent [Montreal]
2007-06-13 1:54 ` Fortier,Vincent [Montreal]
2007-06-14 7:56 ` call for more SD versus CFS comparisons (was: " Jarek Poplawski
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-06-14 10:10 call for more SD versus CFS comparisons (was: Re: [ck] " Tobias Gerschner
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=4673026F.8070406@debianpt.org \
--to=elmig@debianpt.org \
--cc=Martin@lichtvoll.de \
--cc=ck@vds.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