From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262324AbTLNTsy (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Dec 2003 14:48:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262327AbTLNTsx (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Dec 2003 14:48:53 -0500 Received: from smtp3.wanadoo.fr ([193.252.22.28]:45162 "EHLO mwinf0304.wanadoo.fr") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262324AbTLNTsx (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Dec 2003 14:48:53 -0500 From: Guillaume Foliard Organization: _^_ To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Scheduler degradation since 2.5.66 Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 20:48:51 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.93 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200312142048.51579.guifo@wanadoo.fr> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, I have been playing with kernel 2.5/2.6 for around 6 months now. I was quite pleased with 2.5.65 to see that the soft real-time behaviour was much better than 2.4.x. Since then I tried most of the 2.5/2.6 versions. But recently someone warned me about some degradations with 2.6.0-test6. To show the degradation since 2.5.66 I have run a simple test program on most of the versions. This simple program is measuring the time it takes to a process to be woken up after a call to nanosleep. As the results are plots, please visit this small website for more information : http://perso.wanadoo.fr/kayakgabon/linux I'm ready to perform more tests or provide more information if necessary. Guillaume