linux-kernel - Re: [REPORT] First "glitch1" results, 2.6.21-rc7-git6-CFSv5 + SD 0.46

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 24 Apr 2007 08:57:09 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Ed Tomlinson <edt@....ca>
Cc:	davidsen@...idon.tmr.com, "Kolivas, Con" <kernel@...ivas.org>,
	Linux Kernel M/L <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [REPORT] First "glitch1" results, 2.6.21-rc7-git6-CFSv5 + SD 0.46

* Ed Tomlinson <edt@....ca> wrote:

> > SD 0.46		1-2 FPS
> > cfs v5 nice -19	219-233 FPS
> > cfs v5 nice 0 	1000-1996
>    cfs v5 nice -10  60-65 FPS

the problem is, the glxgears portion of this test is an _inverse_ 
testcase.

The reason? glxgears on true 3D hardware will _not_ use X, it will 
directly use the 3D driver of the kernel. So by renicing X to -19 you 
give the xterms more chance to show stuff - the performance of the 
glxgears will 'degrade' - but that is what you asked for: glxgears is 
'just another CPU hog' that competes with X, it's not a "true" X client.

if you are after glxgears performance in this test then you'll get the 
best performance out of this by renicing X to +19 or even SCHED_BATCH.

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/