Hi Steve, On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 06:35:23PM -0700, Steve Muckle wrote: > This series was dropped in favor of Rafael's schedutil. But on the > chance that you're still curious about the test setup used to quantify > the series I'll explain below. I will catch up and learn both.
> These results are meant to show how the governors perform across varying > workload intensities and periodicities. Higher overhead (OH) numbers > indicate that the completion times of each period of the workload were > closer to what they would be when run at fmin (100% overhead would be as > slow as fmin, 0% overhead would be as fast as fmax). And as described > above, overruns (OR) indicate that the governor was not responsive > enough to finish the work in each period of the workload. > > These are just performance metrics so they only tell half the story. > Power is not factored in at all. > > This provides a quick sanity check that the governor under test (in this > case, the now defunct schedfreq, or sched for short) performs similarly > to two of the most commonly used governors, ondemand and interactive, in > steady state periodic workloads. In the data above sched looks good for > the most part with the second test case being the biggest exception. Yes, it is indeed a quick sanity check. Thanks, Yuyang
