Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761105AbXETGMj (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 May 2007 02:12:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758970AbXETGMb (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 May 2007 02:12:31 -0400 Received: from server021.webpack.hosteurope.de ([80.237.130.29]:45811 "EHLO server021.webpack.hosteurope.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758679AbXETGMb (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 May 2007 02:12:31 -0400 From: Michael Gerdau Organization: Technosis GmbH To: Bill Davidsen Subject: Re: Sched - graphic smoothness under load - cfs-v13 sd-0.48 Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 08:12:13 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 Cc: Ray Lee , Linux Kernel M/L References: <464F57DD.2000309@tmr.com> <2c0942db0705191322p54e05e40p512146f21f68299a@mail.gmail.com> <464F99EC.3080006@tmr.com> In-Reply-To: <464F99EC.3080006@tmr.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1514572.0Ezs25GRyo"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200705200812.26391.mgd@technosis.de> X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;mgd@technosis.de;1179641550;c25bf37e; Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2090 Lines: 56 --nextPart1514572.0Ezs25GRyo Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline > Okay, here's a bonus, http://www.tmr.com/~davidsen/sched_smooth_02.html=20 > not only has the right values, the labels are changed, and I included=20 > more data points from the fc6 recent kernel and the 2.6.21.1 kernel with= =20 > the mainline scheduler. >=20 > The nice thing about this test and the IPC test I posted recently is=20 > that they are reasonable stable on the same hardware, so even if someone= =20 > argues about what they show, they show the same thing each time and can=20 > therefore be used to compare changes. I'm not sure I follow you here. The difference between 2.6.21 and 2.6.21.1 are two simple (as in involving little code) changes to ip4 and ip6 net and I'm not even sure that code is used at all in your tests. [Read: IMO the 2.6.21 and 2.6.21.1 figures are for identical cases]. Assuming the above is correct then IMO the variance between the two "dublicated" lines (cfs-v13 and sd048) is such that I would not have written "that they are reasonable stable on the same hardware". I don't want to say the values aren't useful. I simply think there is a high noiselevel. Best, Michael =2D-=20 Technosis GmbH, Gesch=E4ftsf=FChrer: Michael Gerdau, Tobias Dittmar Sitz Hamburg; HRB 89145 Amtsgericht Hamburg Vote against SPAM - see http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/ Michael Gerdau email: mgd@technosis.de GPG-keys available on request or at public keyserver --nextPart1514572.0Ezs25GRyo Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBGT+bKUYYhyuxDQc4RApc1AKCqq5r4SzhqodDx+qwL1AT4GBeGEwCdG0Me VUSrGH5eaYMy+IF0ZS2LtKw= =fIPR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1514572.0Ezs25GRyo-- - 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/