From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757400AbXGHUwR (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jul 2007 16:52:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756727AbXGHUwE (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jul 2007 16:52:04 -0400 Received: from [212.12.190.212] ([212.12.190.212]:34033 "EHLO raad.intranet" rhost-flags-FAIL-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756698AbXGHUwC (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jul 2007 16:52:02 -0400 From: Al Boldi To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v19 Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2007 23:51:56 +0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200707082351.56694.a1426z@gawab.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Ingo Molnar wrote: > The biggest user-visible change in -v19 is reworked sleeper fairness: > it's similar in behavior to -v18 but works more consistently across nice > levels. Fork-happy workloads (like kernel builds) should behave better > as well. There are also a handful of speedups: unsigned math, 32-bit > speedups, O(1) task pickup, debloating and other micro-optimizations. Thanks, these changes show an obvious improvement with heavy forklifters. But there is one strange artifact; fork response is not consistant over successive runs, i.e. sometimes it starves, sometimes it moves, and sometimes it flies. It looks like it's dependent on some sched-stats to accumulate before it stablizes. Also, fork/thread creation is one aspect of testing, but what about thread termination performance, which has to sync back to the creating thread? How is that handled, and is there some code around that can test this? Thanks! -- Al