linux-kernel - Re: [ck] Re: SD still better than CFS for 3d ?(was Re: 2.6.23-rc1)

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <46AE25F3.7020904@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 30 Jul 2007 13:54:59 -0400
From:	Kenneth Prugh <ken69267@...il.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC:	John <darknessenvelops@...il.com>, ck@....kolivas.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Kasper Sandberg <lkml@...anurb.dk>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [ck] Re: SD still better than CFS for 3d ?(was Re: 2.6.23-rc1)

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> <large snip>

Hello, I have a gaming rig and would love to help benchmark with my copy
of UT2004(E6600 Core2 and a 7950GTO card). Or if you have anything else
that would better serve as a benchmark I could grab it and try.

The only problem is I don't know what 2 kernels I should be using to
test the schedulers. I assume 2.6.23-rc1 for CFS, but what about SD?

-- 
Kenneth Prugh

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (253 bytes)