[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090907232415.GA17182@ee.oulu.fi>
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2009 02:24:15 +0300
From: Pekka Pietikainen <pp@...oulu.fi>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Michael Buesch <mb@...sch.de>, Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, Felix Fietkau <nbd@...nwrt.org>
Subject: Re: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements
On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 10:57:01PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > Could you profile it please? Also, what's the context-switch rate?
> >
> > As far as I can tell, the broadcom mips architecture does not have
> > profiling support. It does only have some proprietary profiling
> > registers that nobody wrote kernel support for, yet.
> Well, what does 'vmstat 1' show - how many context switches are
> there per second on the iperf server? In theory if it's a truly
> saturated box, there shouldnt be many - just a single iperf task
Yay, finally something that's measurable in this thread \o/
Gigabit Ethernet iperf on an Atom or so might be something that
shows similar effects yet is debuggable. Anyone feel like taking a shot?
That beast doing iperf probably ends up making it go quite close to it's
limits (IO, mem bw, cpu). IIRC the routing/bridging performance is
something like 40Mbps (depends a lot on the model, corresponds pretty
well with the Mhz of the beast).
Maybe not totally unlike what make -j16 does to a 1-4 core box?
--
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