lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jun]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRE: [PATCH] sched: Folding nohz load accounting more accurate
    Date

    >> On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 08:33 -0700, Doug Smythies wrote:
    > On 2012.06.13 14:58 -0700, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

    >>
    >> All that being said, what I typically do with a new code test is:
    >>
    >> . select a known, previous bad operating point. For example 2
    >> processes, actual load average 0.30 (0.15 for each process) currently
    >> reporting ~1.5.

    > OK, I'll try and apply this. Waiting 63 hours for feedback on patches is
    > something I'm not patient enough for.

    > Would this be:

    > ./waiter 2 900 230608 10000

    Actually it would be:

    ./waiter 2 900 345912 9444

    At least on my computer, with the CPUs locked into powersave mode (lowest
    clock rate). It might be different on your computer as the exact numbers are
    computer dependent.
    I will change the script generating program to add comment lines as to the
    expected execution scenario, as I have troubles also looking up command
    lines.

    > I haven't even bothered reading the waiter proglet yet, but I did notice
    > the 'help' provided when started without arguments doesn't seem to
    > actually match what load_180 does.

    Right, sorry. I think you will find the newer version (from the "wang"
    experiment write up) is O.K.






    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2012-06-14 06:01    [W:2.850 / U:2.228 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site