[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070421073905.GA28073@wotan.suse.de>
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 09:39:05 +0200
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
To: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Bill Huey <billh@...ppy.monkey.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Peter Williams <pwil3058@...pond.net.au>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ck list <ck@....kolivas.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS]
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 04:47:27PM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> >( Lets be cautious though: the jury is still out whether people actually
> > like this more than the current approach. While CFS feedback looks
> > promising after a whopping 3 days of it being released [ ;-) ], the
> > test coverage of all 'fairness centric' schedulers, even considering
> > years of availability is less than 1% i'm afraid, and that < 1% was
> > mostly self-selecting. )
> >
> All of my testing has been on desktop machines, although in most cases
> they were really loaded desktops which had load avg 10..100 from time to
> time, and none were low memory machines. Up to CFS v3 I thought
> nicksched was my winner, now CFSv3 looks better, by not having stumbles
> under stupid loads.
What base_timeslice were you using for nicksched, and what HZ?
-
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