Subject: Re: 2.6.24-git4+ regression
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Lukas Hejtmanek <xhejtman@ics.muni.cz>,
       Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, mingo@redhat.com,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl,
       dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com, aneesh.kumar@in.ibm.com
In-Reply-To: <20080218042831.GJ30201@elte.hu>
References: <20080130135609.GA5100@ics.muni.cz>
	 <20080214165551.GA21963@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	 <20080217202642.GA4327@ics.muni.cz>  <20080218042831.GJ30201@elte.hu>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 08:38:24 +0100
Message-Id: <1203320304.26269.3.camel@homer.simson.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1169
Lines: 28


On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 05:28 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: 
> * Lukas Hejtmanek <xhejtman@ics.muni.cz> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 10:25:51PM +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> > > The patch is against 2.6.25-rc1. I would request you to check for
> > > difference it makes with CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED and
> > > CONFIG_FAIR_USER_SCHED turned on.
> > 
> > well, I tried the patch against 2.6.25-rc2-git1. It seems to be better 
> > but without CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED it is still even better.
> 
> could you try latest sched-devel.git, does it behave any better?

Here, it does not.  It seems fine without CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED.

Oddity:  mainline git with Srivatsa's test patch improves markedly, and
using sched_latency_ns and sched_wakeup_granularity_ns, I can tweak the
regression into submission.  With sched-devel, I cannot tweak it away
with or without the test patch.  Dunno how useful that info is.

	-Mike

--
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/