From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263086AbTHVIzb (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Aug 2003 04:55:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263106AbTHVIzb (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Aug 2003 04:55:31 -0400 Received: from mail4.bluewin.ch ([195.186.4.74]:34953 "EHLO mail4.bluewin.ch") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263086AbTHVIz0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Aug 2003 04:55:26 -0400 Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 10:55:08 +0200 From: Roger Luethi To: Nick Piggin Cc: linux-kernel Subject: Re: [CFT][PATCH] new scheduler policy Message-ID: <20030822085508.GA10215@k3.hellgate.ch> Mail-Followup-To: Nick Piggin , linux-kernel References: <3F4182FD.3040900@cyberone.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F4182FD.3040900@cyberone.com.au> X-Operating-System: Linux 2.6.0-test3 on i686 X-GPG-Fingerprint: 92 F4 DC 20 57 46 7B 95 24 4E 9E E7 5A 54 DC 1B X-GPG: 1024/80E744BD wwwkeys.ch.pgp.net User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 11:53:01 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > I haven't run many tests on it - my mind blanked when I tried to > remember the scores of scheduler "exploits" thrown around. So if > anyone would like to suggest some, or better still, run some, > please do so. And be nice, this isn't my type of scheduler :P I timed a pathological benchmark from hell I've been playing with lately. Three consecutive runs following a fresh boot. Time is in seconds: 2.4.21 821 21 25 2.6.0-test3-mm1 724 946 896 2.6.0-test3-mm1-nick 905 987 997 Runtime with ideal scheduling: < 2 seconds (we're thrashing). If anybody has thrashing test cases closer to the real world, I'd be very interested to learn about them. Roger