Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 18 Dec 2009 14:06:42 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: x264 benchmarks BFS vs CFS |
| |
* Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> wrote:
> > I'm personally curious as to what kind of scheduler issues this results > > in--I haven't done any BFS vs CFS tests with this option enabled yet. > > I'll look for x264 source, and patch/piddle.
btw., would be nice to look at it via tools/perf/ as well:
perf stat --repeat 3 ...
to see the basic hardware utilization (cycles/cache-misses, branch execution rate, instructions, etc.) and the basic parallelism metrics, at a glance.
i suspect "perf stat -e L1-icache-loads -e L1-icache-load-misses" would give us an even more detailed picture.
Ingo
| |