[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1156269661.4954.6.camel@Homer.simpson.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 18:01:01 +0000
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: vatsa@...ibm.com
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
Sam Vilain <sam@...ain.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Kirill Korotaev <dev@...nvz.org>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com>, sekharan@...ibm.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, nagar@...son.ibm.com,
matthltc@...ibm.com, dipankar@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] CPU controller V1 - (temporary) cpuset interface
On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 19:31 +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 03:23:29PM +0000, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > > I try it with everything in either root or mikeg.
>
> How did you transfer everything to root? By cat'ing each task pid
> (including init's) to root (or mikeg) task's file?
Yes.
> I will give your experiment a try here and find out what's happening.
>
> You said that you spawn a task which munches ~80% cpu. Is that by
> something like:
>
> do {
> gettimeofday(&t1, NULL);
> loop:
> gettimeofday(&t2, NULL);
> while (t2.tv_sec - t1.tv_sec != 48)
> goto loop;
> sleep 12
>
> } while (1);
Yeah, a sleep/burn loop. The proggy is a one of several scheduler
exploits posted to lkml over the years. The reason I wanted to test
this patch set was to see how well it handles various nasty loads.
-Mike
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists