linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
To: Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
Cc: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>,
	linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Zwane Mwaikambo <zwane@linuxpower.ca>
Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] 100Hz preempt v nopreempt contest results
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 10:24:31 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030603172431.GW8978@holomorphy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1054659956.633.85.camel@localhost>

On Mon, 2003-06-02 at 23:39, Con Kolivas wrote:
>> Note this time the ratio is less useful since they are both 100Hz. The 
>> difference this time shows a large preempt improvement in process_load much 
>> like 1000Hz did. Interestingly, even unloaded kernels no_load and cache_load 
>> runs are faster with preempt. Only in xtar_load (repeatedly extracting a tar 
>> with multiple small files) was no preempt faster.

On Tue, Jun 03, 2003 at 10:05:58AM -0700, Robert Love wrote:
> Thanks for running these, Con.
> I think this is an example of kernel preemption doing exactly what we
> want it to (improve interactive performance)... probably primarily
> because of the more accurate timeslice distribution.
> Would be interested to figure out why xtar_load is slower.

It would be helpful to get more accurate time accounting a la Mike
Galbraith's patches.


-- wli

      reply	other threads:[~2003-06-03 17:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-06-03  6:39 [BENCHMARK] 100Hz preempt v nopreempt contest results Con Kolivas
2003-06-03 17:05 ` Robert Love
2003-06-03 17:24   ` William Lee Irwin III [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20030603172431.GW8978@holomorphy.com \
    --to=wli@holomorphy.com \
    --cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rml@tech9.net \
    --cc=zwane@linuxpower.ca \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).