[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1287514410.7368.10.camel@marge.simson.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 20:53:30 +0200
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH] sched: automated per tty task groups
> On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 08:28 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > If people compare with a non-CGROUP_SCHED
> > kernel, will a desktop-optimized kernel suddenly have horrible pipe
> > latency due to much higher scheduling cost? Right now that whole
> > feature is hidden by EXPERIMENTAL, I don't know how much it hurts, and
> > I never timed it when I tried it out long ago..
Q/D test of kernels w/wo, with same .config using pipe-test (pure sched)
gives on my box ~590khz with tty_sched active, 620khz without cgroups
acitve in same kernel/config without patch. last time I measured
stripped down config (not long ago, but not yesterday either) gave max
ctx rate ~690khz on this box.
(note: very Q, very D numbers, no variance testing, ballpark)
-Mike
--
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