From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758450AbXFLI5q (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jun 2007 04:57:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755164AbXFLI5h (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jun 2007 04:57:37 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:38001 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754997AbXFLI5g (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jun 2007 04:57:36 -0400 Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:57:30 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Tobias Gerschner Cc: Miguel Figueiredo , linux kernel mailing list , ck@vds.kolivas.org Subject: Re: call for more SD versus CFS comparisons (was: Re: [ck] Mainline plans) Message-ID: <20070612085730.GA17964@elte.hu> References: <466DE921.9030709@debianpt.org> <20070612083620.GA10557@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070612083620.GA10557@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.14 (2007-02-12) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.0.3 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Tobias Gerschner wrote: > > > I did run massive_intr.c for 60 secs with increasing nproc ( > > 10,20,30,40,50,60) waiting for effects. > > > > Below a small table of the results > > > > 2.6.21.1-cfs-v16 > > > > nproc , usability result > > > > 10 , serious frame drops , Firefox hardly recognizes clicked links, > > but still usable > > 20 - 30, usability loss ( somehow under cfs firefox never finished > > user requests like displaying web pages or opening new pages , no > > feedback anymore, sudden changes on the desktop ) > > ouch! The expected load-testing result under CFS should be something > like this: > > http://bhhdoa.org.au/pipermail/ck/2007-June/007817.html i have just tried the same workload with cfs and with sd048 from -ck, and cannot reproduce this. To make sure it's not some other change in -ck, could you try the pure SD patches ontop of 2.6.21.1 too: http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/ck/patches/2.6/2.6.21/2.6.21-ck2/patches/2.6.21-sd-0.48.patch http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/ck/patches/2.6/2.6.21/2.6.21-ck2/patches/sched-sd-0.48-interactive_tunable.patch Ingo