[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090910110912.GL18599@kernel.dk>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 13:09:13 +0200
From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@...or.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements
On Thu, Sep 10 2009, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-09-10 at 12:28 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
>
> > No difference. Then I tried switching NO_NEW_FAIR_SLEEPERS on, and then
> > I get:
> >
> > Performance counter stats for 'xmodmap .xmodmap-carl':
> >
> > 9.009137 task-clock-msecs # 0.447 CPUs
> > 18 context-switches # 0.002 M/sec
> > 1 CPU-migrations # 0.000 M/sec
> > 315 page-faults # 0.035 M/sec
> > <not counted> cycles
> > <not counted> instructions
> > <not counted> cache-references
> > <not counted> cache-misses
> >
> > 0.020167093 seconds time elapsed
> >
> > Woot!
>
> Something is very seriously hosed on that box... clock?
model name : Genuine Intel(R) CPU T2400 @ 1.83GHz
Throttles down to 1.00GHz when idle.
> Can you turn it back on, and do..
I guess you mean turn NEW_FAIR_SLEEPERS back on, correct?
> while sleep .1; do cat /proc/sched_debug >> foo; done
> ..on one core, and (quickly;) xmodmap .xmodmap-carl, then send me a few
> seconds worth (gzipped up) to eyeball?
Attached.
--
Jens Axboe
Download attachment "sched-debug-cat.bz2" of type "application/octet-stream" (12209 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists