Re: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements

[Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>]

On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 10:37:45 +0300
Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@arcor.de> wrote:

> (Volker stripped all CCs from his posts; I restored them manually.)
> 
> On 09/11/2009 09:33 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > this is with 2.6.31+reiser4+fglrx
> > Phenom II X4 955
> >
> > KDE 4.3.1, composite temporary disabled.
> > tvtime running.
> >
> > load:
> > fat emerge with make -j5 running in one konsole tab (xulrunner being
> > compiled).
> >
> > without NO_NEW_FAIR_SLEEPERS:
> >
> > tvtime is smooth most of the time
> >
> > with NO_NEW_FAIR_SLEEPERS:
> >
> > tvtime is more jerky. Very visible in scenes with movement.
> 
> Is the make -j5 running niced 0?  If yes, that would be actually the 
> correct behavior.  Unfortunately, I can't test tvtime specifically (I 
> don't have a TV card), but other applications displaying video
> continue to work smooth on my dual core machine (Core 2 Duo E6600)
> even if I do "nice -n 19 make -j20".  If I don't nice it, the video
> is skippy here too though.
> 
> Question to Ingo:
> Would posting perf results help in any way with finding differences 
> between mainline NEW_FAIR_SLEEPERS/NO_NEW_FAIR_SLEEPERS and BFS?

please also post latencytop output for the app you care about
(the system wide latencytop numbers aren't as relevant; to some large
degree what is happening is that if you oversubscribe, you need to pay
the price for that period, all you can do is move the cost around to
those tasks you don't care about. For that reason, latencytop output
for the task you care about is relevant ;-)


-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org