linux-kernel - Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v18

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070705133947.GB9003@saltmine.radix.net>
Date:	Thu, 5 Jul 2007 09:39:47 -0400
From:	Thomas Dickey <dickey@...ix.net>
To:	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v18

On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 10:40:07AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> yeah, i use gnome-terminal exclusively. But testers looking for CFS 
> regressions do run every shell on the planet :-)

...and people running older kernels get different results (no surprise)

fwiw, I ran 'top' on 5 terminals with xterm-spam running concurrently
on 2.6.15 (rxvt, pterm, xterm, konsole and gnome-terminal).

For that case, gnome-terminal was definitely the slowest,
and used the most CPU time (more than a factor of three slower
than xterm).  konsole was about 2.5, pterm was about the same
as xterm, and rxvt about half the CPU (ymmv).
> 
> gnome-terminal is also faster all around (at least on my box):

-- 
Thomas E. Dickey
http://invisible-island.net
ftp://invisible-island.net

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped