Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S269114AbUICHAX (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Sep 2004 03:00:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S269261AbUICHAX (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Sep 2004 03:00:23 -0400 Received: from mx1.elte.hu ([157.181.1.137]:31944 "EHLO mx1.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S269114AbUICHAO (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Sep 2004 03:00:14 -0400 Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2004 09:01:36 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Lee Revell Cc: Eric St-Laurent , linux-kernel , "K.R. Foley" , Felipe Alfaro Solana , Daniel Schmitt , Mark_H_Johnson@raytheon.com, "P.O. Gaillard" Subject: Re: [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-R0 Message-ID: <20040903070136.GA13100@elte.hu> References: <20040902065549.GA18860@elte.hu> <20040902111003.GA4256@elte.hu> <20040902215728.GA28571@elte.hu> <1094162812.1347.54.camel@krustophenia.net> <20040902221402.GA29434@elte.hu> <1094171082.19760.7.camel@krustophenia.net> <1094181447.4815.6.camel@orbiter> <1094192788.19760.47.camel@krustophenia.net> <20040903063658.GA11801@elte.hu> <1094194157.19760.71.camel@krustophenia.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1094194157.19760.71.camel@krustophenia.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-ELTE-SpamVersion: MailScanner 4.31.6-itk1 (ELTE 1.2) SpamAssassin 2.63 ClamAV 0.73 X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-4.9, required 5.9, autolearn=not spam, BAYES_00 -4.90 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamScore: -4 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1366 Lines: 30 * Lee Revell wrote: > > vanilla kernel 2.6.8.1 would be quite interesting to get a few charts of > > - especially if your measurement methodology has changed. > > OK, I will give this a shot. Now that the VP patches are stabilizing > I will be doing more profiling. I also want to try the -mm kernel, > this has some interesting differences from the stock kernel. For > example I measured about a 10% improvement with the old method, which > implies a big performance gain. the -mm kernel used to have additional *-latency-fix patches that were done based on the initial preemption-timing patch in -mm and partly based on early VP discussions and findings. I recently reviewed and merged the 2-3 missing ones into VP. Andrew has dropped these patches meanwhile and i expect to submit the cleaner and more complete solution that is in VP. So i'd expect -mm to still perform better than vanilla (it usually does), but if that big 10% difference in latencies doesnt show up anymore i'd attribute it to the shuffling around of latency related patches, not some genuine deficiency in -mm. Ingo - 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/