Subject: Re: scheduler vs hardware? (was Re: another i7  (linux) bug?)
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Luca Zini <luca.zini@gmail.com>, aagaande@gmail.com, rdelcueto@hotmail.com,
       mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Alex Chiang <achiang@hp.com>
In-Reply-To: <1264152314.12530.8.camel@marge.simson.net>
References: <201001211258.23499.luca.zini@gmail.com>
	 <20100121215438.GK17684@ldl.fc.hp.com>
	 <1264144758.8074.22.camel@marge.simson.net>
	 <1264150272.4283.1361.camel@laptop>
	 <1264152314.12530.8.camel@marge.simson.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 10:34:20 +0100
Message-ID: <1264152860.4283.1442.camel@laptop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 911
Lines: 30

On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 10:25 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 09:51 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> > My laptop does:
> > 
> > 
> > # time nice -n 19 lame -b 256 -V0 -h youcantdothat.wav - > /dev/null
> 
> > real    0m3.273s
> > user    0m3.217s
> > sys     0m0.022s
> > 
> > 
> > # time nice -n 0 lame -b 256 -V0 -h youcantdothat.wav - > /dev/null
> 
> > real    0m1.121s
> > user    0m1.102s
> > sys     0m0.013s
> 
> I don't see any way that can be scheduler (knocks wood).  Could it be
> cpufreq?  IIRC there is or was an ignore nice gizmo in there.

That's a laptop with full desktop bloat, I'm sure either firefox or evo
farted, or both.

--
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/