| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2007 03:02:19 +1000 From: "Matthew Hawkins" <darthmdh@...il.com> To: "Miguel Figueiredo" <elmig@...ianpt.org> Cc: ck@....kolivas.org, "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Kasper Sandberg" <lkml@...anurb.dk> Subject: Re: [ck] Re: SD still better than CFS for 3d ?(was Re: 2.6.23-rc1) On 8/1/07, Miguel Figueiredo <elmig@...ianpt.org> wrote: > Have you tryied the 2 modes of the patch? Here's my stats for sched_yield_ctl = 2 loops fps 0 48 1 48 2 48 3 48 4 39 5 39 6 39 7 28 8 28 9 22 10 18 Once again it was very jerky come run-around-the-map time, though it improved over time. For me, still not as smooth as CFS was (especially the initial player movement, which was the worst by far of any test so far) I want to get some better numbers than plain fps though, the graph of the numbers is more staircase-like in this test but what it doesn't show is exactly what's going on. I can assure you the framerates may be similar but the gameplay isn't - and in this test 5fps difference is meaningless since it jumps around a lot (especially during the run-around) as you would expect with the different stuff needing to be rendered. -- Matt - 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