On Sun, 2007-10-14 at 01:13 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-10-13 at 11:17 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > > Ah, but HRTICK is not compatible with PREEMPT_RESTRICT, it will be
> > > similar to !WAKEUP_PREEMPT.
> >
> > (I do plan to fix that eventually, just need to do it)
>
> I guess something like this ought to do, but its a tad late so I'm quite
> sure :-)
2.6.23-smp-d-hrt + restrict fix patch
[SUM] 0.0-300.1 sec 176 GBytes 5.03 Gbits/sec
[SUM] 0.0-300.1 sec 175 GBytes 5.02 Gbits/sec
[SUM] 0.0-300.1 sec 176 GBytes 5.05 Gbits/sec
Context switches are further reduced (across the board) over
PREEMPT_RESTRICT, dropping from ~7-8k to ~2.5k with this test, vs ~950
for SCHED_BATCH and ~50k with this tree and no restriction. Throughput
is ~96% of SCHED_BATCH, vs ~55% with no restriction. I see no
interactivity regressions.
-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/
[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]
