* Ed Tomlinson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Rob,
>
> I gather this was with the complete -ck patchset? It would be
> interesting to see if just SD performed as well. If it does, CFS
> needs more work. if not there are other things in -ck that really do
> improve performance and should be looked into.
yeah. The biggest item in -ck besides SD is swap-prefetch, but that
shouldnt have an effect in this case. I _think_ that most of the
measured difference is due to scheduler details though. Right now my
estimation is that with the patch i sent to Rob, and with latest
sched-devel.git, CFS should perform as good or better than SD, even in
these micro-benchmarks. (but i cannot tell what will happen on Rob's
machine - so i'm keeping an open mind towards any other fixables :-) I'm
curious about the next round of numbers (if Rob has time to do them).
Ingo
-
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]
