[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070422130725.GA16601@1wt.eu>
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2007 15:07:25 +0200
From: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To: Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>
Cc: ck@....kolivas.org, Michael Gerdau <mgd@...hnosis.de>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@...il.com>,
Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com>,
Bill Huey <billh@...ppy.monkey.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>,
Peter Williams <pwil3058@...pond.net.au>,
Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
Subject: Re: [ck] Re: [ANNOUNCE] Staircase Deadline cpu scheduler version 0.45
On Sun, Apr 22, 2007 at 10:18:32PM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Sunday 22 April 2007 21:42, Con Kolivas wrote:
>
> Willy I'm still investigating the idle time and fluctuating load as a separate
> issue.
OK.
> Is it possible the multiple ocbench processes are naturally
> synchronising and desynchronising and choosing to sleep and/or run at the
> same time?
I don't think so. They're independant processes, and I insist on reducing
their X work in order to ensure they don't get perturbated by external
factor. Their work consist in looping 250 ms and waiting 750 ms, then
displaying a new progress line.
> I can remove the idle time entirely by running ocbench at nice 19
> which means they are all forced to run at basically the same time by the
> scheduler.
It may indicate some special handling of nice ?
> Anyway the more important part is... Can you test this patch please? Dump
> all the other patches I sent you post 045. Michael, if you could test too
> please?
OK, I will restart from fresh 0.45 and try again.
Regards,
Willy
-
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