From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261153AbTEAR6o (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 May 2003 13:58:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261159AbTEAR6o (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 May 2003 13:58:44 -0400 Received: from dyn-ctb-210-9-246-153.webone.com.au ([210.9.246.153]:54544 "EHLO chimp.local.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261153AbTEAR6n (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 May 2003 13:58:43 -0400 Message-ID: <3EB1632E.5000302@cyberone.com.au> Date: Fri, 02 May 2003 04:10:54 +1000 From: Nick Piggin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030327 Debian/1.3-4 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rwhron@earthlink.net CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.5.68 and 2.5.68-mm2 References: <20030430005902.GA32599@rushmore> In-Reply-To: <20030430005902.GA32599@rushmore> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org rwhron@earthlink.net wrote: >>A run with deadline on mm would be nice to see. >> > >Summary: >Most benchmarks don't show much difference between 2.5.68-mm2 using >anticipatory vs deadline scheduler. AIM7 had almost no difference. >Tiobench has the most difference. > OK, thanks for that. I'd say it could be a TCQ or possibly RAID or driver problem. I don't have anything in mind to fix it yet but it has to be addressed at some point.