[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e85b9d30909110310w210fd154k17544bf4d78a0df8@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 12:10:16 +0200
From: Mat <jackdachef@...il.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Martin@...htvoll.de
Cc: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@...or.de>, efault@....de,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements
Martin Steigerwald <Martin <at> lichtvoll.de> writes:
>
> Am Donnerstag 10 September 2009 schrieb Ingo Molnar:
[snip]
> > what is /debug/sched_features - is NO_NEW_FAIR_SLEEPERS set? If not
> > set yet then try it:
> >
> > echo NO_NEW_FAIR_SLEEPERS > /debug/sched_features
> >
> > that too might make things more fluid.
Hi Martin,
it made an tremendous difference which still has to be tested out :)
Hi Ingo,
which adverse effect could
cat /proc/sys/kernel/sched_wakeup_granularity_ns
0
have on the throughput ?
Concerning that "NO_NEW_FAIR_SLEEPERS" switch - isn't it as easy as to
do the following ? (I'm not sure if there's supposed to be another debug)
echo NO_NEW_FAIR_SLEEPERS > /sys/kernel/debug/sched_features
which after the change says:
cat /sys/kernel/debug/sched_features
NO_NEW_FAIR_SLEEPERS NO_NORMALIZED_SLEEPER ADAPTIVE_GRAN WAKEUP_PREEMPT
START_DEBIT AFFINE_WAKEUPS CACHE_HOT_BUDDY SYNC_WAKEUPS NO_HRTICK NO_DOUBLE_TICK
ASYM_GRAN LB_BIAS LB_WAKEUP_UPDATE ASYM_EFF_LOAD NO_WAKEUP_OVERLAP LAST_BUDDY
OWNER_SPIN
I hope that's the correct switch ^^
Greetings and please keep on improving the scheduler (especially with regards to
the desktop crowd)
Regards
Mat
(Sorry for the "double-post" - this one is including all of the CC
which GMane left out :) )
--
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