On Thu, 26 Dec 2002 12:24 am, Denis Vlasenko wrote:
> On 21 December 2002 19:18, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > osdl hardware, contest results, 2.5.52-mm2 with scheduler tunable -
> > exit weight (ew1= exit weight ==1 and so on)
> >
> > io_load:
> > Kernel [runs] Time CPU% Loads LCPU% Ratio
> > ew0 [5] 105.3 90 16 22 2.91
> > ew1 [5] 86.4 97 12 18 2.39
> > ew2 [5] 74.9 109 9 18 2.07
> > ew3 [5] 84.2 100 11 19 2.33
> > ew4 [5] 83.8 102 10 18 2.31
> > ew5 [5] 89.9 93 12 20 2.48
> > ew6 [5] 97.5 88 13 20 2.69
> > ew7 [5] 89.2 95 12 20 2.46
>
> In spite of worrying reports of decreasing single task performance,
> does it make sense to add "null_load" test? ;)
I've simplified the data. There is no significant difference in the no_load
groups with changes to the scheduler tunables over useful ranges.
Con
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+CXyRF6dfvkL3i1gRAtSyAJ9XThpp5iCI1FcjDxVOESbm5ialywCgg7Vb
HN+jWurjIwXngqCUOmDWhh0=
=7Iy8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
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/