Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752629AbZISUWg (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Sep 2009 16:22:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752540AbZISUWf (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Sep 2009 16:22:35 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:40415 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752535AbZISUWf (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Sep 2009 16:22:35 -0400 Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2009 22:22:22 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Felix Fietkau Cc: Michael Buesch , Con Kolivas , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Mike Galbraith Subject: Re: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements Message-ID: <20090919202222.GA26621@elte.hu> References: <20090906205952.GA6516@elte.hu> <20090907182629.GA3484@elte.hu> <20090908074825.GA11413@elte.hu> <200909081645.18505.mb@bu3sch.de> <20090918112454.GE9930@elte.hu> <4AB39D3A.3000204@openwrt.org> <20090919180124.GK5366@elte.hu> <4AB52667.6020608@openwrt.org> <20090919193956.GA21719@elte.hu> <4AB53BCC.503@openwrt.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4AB53BCC.503@openwrt.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1641 Lines: 37 * Felix Fietkau wrote: > Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Felix Fietkau wrote: > >> I did some tests with BFS v230 vs CFS on Linux 2.6.30 on a different > >> MIPS device (Atheros AR2317) with 180 MHz and 16 MB RAM. When running > >> iperf tests, I consistently get the following results when running the > >> transfer from the device to my laptop: > >> > >> CFS: [ 5] 0.0-60.0 sec 107 MBytes 15.0 Mbits/sec > >> BFS: [ 5] 0.0-60.0 sec 119 MBytes 16.6 Mbits/sec > >> > >> The transfer speed from my laptop to the device are the same with BFS > >> and CFS. I repeated the tests a few times just to be sure, and I will > >> check vmstat later. > > > > Which exact mainline kernel have you tried? For anything performance > > related running latest upstream -git (currently at 202c467) would be > > recommended. > > I used the OpenWrt-patched 2.6.30. Support for the hardware that I > tested with hasn't been merged upstream yet. Do you think that the > scheduler related changes after 2.6.30 are relevant for non-SMP > performance as well? If so, I'll work on a test with latest upstream > -git with the necessary patches when I have time for it. Dont know - it's hard to tell what happens without basic analysis tools. Is there _any_ way to profile what happens on that system? (Do hrtimers work on it that could be used to profile it?) 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/