On 9/22/06, Ludovic Drolez <[email protected]> wrote:
Vincent Pelletier wrote:
> Maybe I was completely wrong with my assumption that one running process
> always has an impact of 1, which would have make the scheduler underestimate
> the load on one cpu and put too many processes on it, without moving them
> afterward.
Yes, maybe that's the problem, since in my bench, one process takes only 40% of
the CPU.
Cheers,
--
Ludovic DROLEZ Linbox / Free&ALter Soft
www.linbox.com www.linbox.org tel: +33 3 87 50 87 90
152 rue de Grigy - Technopole Metz 2000 57070 METZ
-
Provided you have enough memory, the somewhat better way to test this
is to turn off swap, copy the sources to a tmpfs directory and compile
there. Then any disks accesses would be only related to reloading code
pages from the compiler / daemons /shared libs, which having even more
ram would solve so that it's all compute bound. I guess even 1.5Gb of
ram is plenty for all this, and not so much costly nowdays for a
kernel hacker ;)
--
Greetz, Antonio Vargas aka winden of network
http://network.amigascne.org/
[email protected]
[email protected]
Every day, every year
you have to work
you have to study
you have to scene.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
