* Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-09-26 11:47]:
> > > this will gather a good deal of info about the workload in question.
> > > Please send me the resulting debug file.
> > Another thing: please also do the same with the vanilla v2.6.22 kernel,
> > and send me that file too. (so that the two cases can be compared)
>
> I put the log files here:
> http://www.cyrius.com/tmp/2.6.22
> http://www.cyrius.com/tmp/2.6.23-rc8-sched-devel
>
> I increased the time ipfer ran to 30 secs since your script runs for
> over 15 secs. I got:
>
> [ 3] 0.0-30.0 sec 331 MBytes 92.6 Mbits/sec 2.6.22
> vs
> [ 3] 0.0-30.0 sec 222 MBytes 62.1 Mbits/sec 2.6.23-rc8-sched-devel
thanks!
the test does almost no context switches:
procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- -system-- ----cpu----
r b swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id wa
2 0 0 462928 3280 37216 0 0 137 75 2306 83 13 38 47 2
2 0 0 462928 3280 37216 0 0 0 0 8600 54 6 94 0 0
2 0 0 462928 3280 37216 0 0 0 36 8667 55 7 93 0 0
2 0 0 462928 3280 37216 0 0 0 0 8592 53 5 95 0 0
2 0 0 462928 3280 37216 0 0 0 0 8638 52 7 93 0 0
(the 'cs' column shows 50-80 context switches per second.)
so there must be some other side-effect, not raw scheduling overhead or
some other direct scheduler performance problem.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
