[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:35:11 -0700
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH v3] sched: automated per tty task groups
On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 20:15 +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> Just to add some data; here are the results from my machine (AMD 4
> cores) running a -j4 kernel build, while I browsed the web:
>
> 1) perf sched record sleep 30
>
> without:
> total_wakeups: 44306
> avg_wakeup_latency (ns): 36784
> min_wakeup_latency (ns): 0
> max_wakeup_latency (ns): 9378852
>
> with:
> total_wakeups: 43836
> avg_wakeup_latency (ns): 67607
> min_wakeup_latency (ns): 0
> max_wakeup_latency (ns): 8983036
>
> 2) perf record -a -e sched:sched_switch -e sched:sched_wakeup sleep 10
>
> without:
> total_wakeups: 13195
> avg_wakeup_latency (ns): 48484
> min_wakeup_latency (ns): 0
> max_wakeup_latency (ns): 8722497
>
> with:
> total_wakeups: 14106
> avg_wakeup_latency (ns): 92532
> min_wakeup_latency (ns): 20
> max_wakeup_latency (ns): 5642393
>
> So the avg_wakeup_latency nearly doubled with your patch, while the
> max_wakeup_latency is lowered by a good amount.
When you say with/without, does that mean enabled/disabled, or
patched/virgin and/or cgroups/nocgroups?
-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