Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 7 Sep 2009 19:38:46 +0200 | From | Jens Axboe <> | Subject | Re: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements |
| |
On Mon, Sep 07 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 07 2009, Jens Axboe wrote: > > > Scheduler Runtime Max lat Avg lat Std dev > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > CFS 100 951 462 267 > > > CFS-x2 100 983 484 308 > > > BFS > > > BFS-x2 > > > > Those numbers are buggy, btw, it's not nearly as bad. But > > responsiveness under compile load IS bad though, the test app just > > didn't quantify it correctly. I'll see if I can get it working > > properly. > > What's the default latency target on your box: > > cat /proc/sys/kernel/sched_latency_ns > > ?
It's off right now, but it is set to whatever is the default. I don't touch it.
> And yes, it would be wonderful to get a test-app from you that would > express the kind of pain you are seeing during compile jobs.
I was hoping this one would, but it's not showing anything. I even added support for doing the ping and wakeup over a socket, to see if the pipe test was doing well because of the sync wakeup we do there. The net latency is a little worse, but still good. So no luck in making that app so far.
-- Jens Axboe
| |