From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 20:35:22 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 20:34:58 -0500 Received: from gateway.sequent.com ([192.148.1.10]:65452 "EHLO gateway.sequent.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 20:34:46 -0500 Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 17:34:35 -0800 From: Mike Kravetz To: Andrea Arcangeli Cc: Mike Kravetz , lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] Re: multi-queue scheduler update Message-ID: <20010118173435.K8637@w-mikek.des.sequent.com> In-Reply-To: <20010118155311.B8637@w-mikek.des.sequent.com> <20010119012616.D32087@athlon.random> <20010118165225.E8637@w-mikek.des.sequent.com> <20010119023041.F32087@athlon.random> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <20010119023041.F32087@athlon.random>; from andrea@suse.de on Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 02:30:41AM +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 02:30:41AM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 04:52:25PM -0800, Mike Kravetz wrote: > > was less than the number of processors. I'll give the tests a try > > with a smaller number of threads. I'm also open to suggestions for > > OK! > > > what benchmarks/test methods I could use for scheduler testing. If > > you remember what people have used in the past, please let me know. > > It was this one IIRC (it spawns threads calling sched_yield() in loop). Thanks! At first glance this looks to be the same type of test/benchmark I have been using. - Mike - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/