Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 21 Oct 2003 14:16:08 -0700 | From | "Martin J. Bligh" <> | Subject | Re: Nick's scheduler v16 |
| |
> I'm starting to do some large SMP / NUMA testing. Fixed and changed quite > a bit. It isn't too bad, although I'm only testing dbench, tbench, and > volanomark at the moment. > > These SMP and NUMA changes are not tied to my interactivity stuff, so its > possible they could get included if they turn out well. If you find any > problems with it (high end or interactivity), please let me know.
Interesting ... some things get getter, some worse:
Kernbench: (make -j N vmlinux, where N = 2 x num_cpus) Elapsed System User CPU 2.6.0-test8 45.20 100.97 566.65 1476.25 2.6.0-test8-nick 44.81 93.98 568.49 1477.50 2.6.0-test8-nick2 44.78 94.69 568.81 1482.00
elapsed is a tiny bit faster, system is significantly less, but with higher parallelism:
Kernbench: (make -j vmlinux, maximal tasks) Elapsed System User CPU 2.6.0-test8 45.86 119.41 569.66 1502.00 2.6.0-test8-nick 47.00 112.75 590.40 1495.00 2.6.0-test8-nick2 47.11 112.86 590.31 1491.50
elapsed is definitely worse now. SDET is a happy bunny though:
SDET 128 (see disclaimer) Throughput Std. Dev 2.6.0-test8 100.0% 0.3% 2.6.0-test8-nick 109.9% 0.2%
Much of the changes there might just be backing out Con's interactivity changes ...
M.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |