Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 14 Sep 2002 11:49:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 14 Sep 2002 11:49:27 -0400 Received: from pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.122]:39307 "EHLO pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 14 Sep 2002 11:49:26 -0400 Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2002 11:57:25 -0400 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: irman takes 50x longer without O(1) on uniprocessor Message-ID: <20020914155725.GA12337@rushmore> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i From: rwhron@earthlink.net Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2002 Lines: 52 I've noticed running irman on uniprocessor with the O(1) scheduler takes a lot less time than the mainline scheduler. Only 2.4.20-pre5 and 2.4.20-pre6 below don't have a version of the O(1) scheduler: seconds to run irman 3 times 2.4.20-pre4-ac1 1420 2.4.20-pre5-ac1 1872 2.4.20-pre5 162088 2.4.20-pre5aa1 2264 2.4.20-pre5aa2 2274 2.4.20-pre6 111651 2.5.32-viro-mm1 2209 2.5.33-mm1-poll 2168 2.5.33-mm1 1679 2.5.33-mm5 2374 2.5.33 2408 There are some differences in context switch, user, and system times between O(1) haves and have nots. Oddly, the user time without O(1) is higher, yet it takes longer to complete. vmstat 60 on 2.4.20-pre6 procs memory swap io system cpu r b w swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id 3 0 0 2012 364212 10468 2264 0 0 0 1 100 27467 18 82 0 2 0 0 2012 364172 10492 2268 0 0 0 1 100 27488 18 82 0 2 0 0 2012 364144 10508 2268 0 0 0 1 100 27555 18 82 0 vmstat 60 on 2.4.20-pre5-ac1 procs memory swap io system cpu r b w swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id 3 0 0 1692 365848 1488 7756 0 0 0 1 100 36821 4 96 0 2 0 0 1692 365832 1504 7756 0 0 0 1 100 37334 6 94 0 3 0 0 1692 365816 1520 7756 0 0 0 1 100 37005 5 95 0 Quad xeon doesn't have a huge difference in "real" time to run irman. Does anyone know what would cause a 50-100x difference in time to execute irman on uniprocessor? -- Randy Hron http://home.earthlink.net/~rwhron/kernel/bigbox.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/