[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <704b858792e48dbf4b45c9bf8f0529080acbe246.camel@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2023 10:26:52 +0100
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, mingo@...nel.org,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
mgorman@...e.de, bristot@...hat.com, corbet@....net,
qyousef@...alina.io, chris.hyser@...cle.com,
patrick.bellasi@...bug.net, pjt@...gle.com, pavel@....cz,
qperret@...gle.com, tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com, joshdon@...gle.com,
timj@....org, kprateek.nayak@....com, yu.c.chen@...el.com,
youssefesmat@...omium.org, joel@...lfernandes.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] sched/fair: Implement an EEVDF like policy
On Wed, 2023-03-08 at 09:39 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> netperf cfs +eevdf vs cfs
> TCP_SENDFILE-1 Avg: 89258 92080 1.031
> TCP_SENDFILE-2 Avg: 83271 83371 1.001
> TCP_SENDFILE-4 Avg: 56395 53011 .939
> TCP_SENDFILE-8 Avg: 26389 39470 1.495
> TCP_SENDFILE-16 Avg: 10251 19590 1.911
Forgot to recheck this not so modest clients >= CPUS win, it's also
repeatable.
-Mike
Powered by blists - more mailing lists