Re: [PATCH] sched: high-res preemption tick

On Sat, 2007-10-13 at 11:17 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> Also, this seems to suggest iperf would like SCHED_BATCH.

Yes.  Throughput falls as preemption climbs.

	-Mike

-
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/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH] sched: high-res preemption tick
    • From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] sched: high-res preemption tick
    • From: Mike Galbraith <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] sched: high-res preemption tick
    • From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] sched: high-res preemption tick
    • From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] Reiser4: Drop 'size' argument from bio_endio and bi_end_io
• Next by Date: Re: [linux-2.6.git] IDE/ATA fighting over driver name?
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] sched: high-res preemption tick
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] sched: high-res preemption tick
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]