From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932553AbVHSElM (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Aug 2005 00:41:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932554AbVHSElM (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Aug 2005 00:41:12 -0400 Received: from omta05sl.mx.bigpond.com ([144.140.93.195]:11098 "EHLO omta05sl.mx.bigpond.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932553AbVHSElM (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Aug 2005 00:41:12 -0400 Message-ID: <430562E5.1070208@bigpond.net.au> Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:41:09 +1000 From: Peter Williams User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050720) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Con Kolivas CC: Lee Revell , Michal Piotrowski , LKML Subject: Re: Schedulers benchmark - Was: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] PlugSched-5.2.4 for 2.6.12 and 2.6.13-rc6 References: <43001E18.8020707@bigpond.net.au> <6bffcb0e050818200936bad1d3@mail.gmail.com> <1124422128.25424.7.camel@mindpipe> <200508191341.24821.kernel@kolivas.org> In-Reply-To: <200508191341.24821.kernel@kolivas.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-6; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH PLAIN at omta05sl.mx.bigpond.com from [147.10.133.38] using ID pwil3058@bigpond.net.au at Fri, 19 Aug 2005 04:41:09 +0000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Con Kolivas wrote: > On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 01:28 pm, Lee Revell wrote: > >>On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 05:09 +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote: >> >>>Hi, >>>here are interbench v0.29 resoults: >> >>The X test under simulated "Compile" load looks most interesting. >> >>Most of the schedulers do quite poorly on this test - only Zaphod with >>default max_ia_bonus and max_tpt_bonus manages to deliver under 100ms >>max latency. As expected with interactivity bonus disabled it performs >>horribly. > > > The compile load is not a real compile load; it is an extreme exaggeration of > what happens during a compile and this is done to increase the sensitivity of > this test. It is _not_ worth trying to get a perfect score in this. > > >>I'd like to see some results with X reniced to -10. Despite what the >>2.6 release notes say, this still seems to make a difference. > > > Well of course it helps X - but then any X load totally fscks up audio on > mainline and staircase which is why it's recommended not to renice it. Maybe we could use interbench to find a nice value for X that doesn't destroy Audio and Video? The results that I just posted for spa_no_frills with X reniced to -10 suggest that the other schedulers could cope with something closer to zero. Peter -- Peter Williams pwil3058@bigpond.net.au "Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious." -- Ambrose Bierce