Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751267Ab0LEFMG (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Dec 2010 00:12:06 -0500 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.44.51]:38986 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750743Ab0LEFME convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Dec 2010 00:12:04 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=KKl/HRxLXCh7H0K0rMiKBqeiiJno44qaYSdT3og9ITgoQPbhN/6CIna1T9ZW0BYiTv 21+u1MSzladLReS085AA== MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20101121133744.GA10765@elte.hu> <1290700829.4759.16.camel@maggy.simson.net> <1290954299.30515.15.camel@marge.simson.net> <4CF5C379.8030204@google.com> <1291184173.7466.147.camel@marge.simson.net> <4CF87C14.8000708@google.com> From: Paul Turner Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2010 21:11:29 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] sched: automated per session task groups To: James Courtier-Dutton Cc: Mike Galbraith , Ingo Molnar , Oleg Nesterov , Peter Zijlstra , Linus Torvalds , LKML Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-System-Of-Record: true Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1731 Lines: 41 On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 3:55 PM, James Courtier-Dutton wrote: > On 3 December 2010 05:11, Paul Turner wrote: >> >> I actually don't have a desktop setup handy to test "interactivity" (sad but >> true -- working on grabbing one). ?But it looks better on under synthetic >> load. >> > > What tools are actually used to test "interactivity" ? > I posted a tool to the list some time ago, but I don't think anyone noticed. > My tool is very simple. > When you hold a key down, it should repeat. It should repeat at a > constant predictable interval. > So, my tool just waits for key presses and times when each one occurred. > The tester simply presses a key and holds it down. > If the time between each key press is constant, it indicates good > "interactivity". If the time between each key press varies a lot, it > indicates bad "interactivity". > You can reliably test if one kernel is better than the next using > actual measurable figures. > > Kind Regards > > James > Could you drop me a pointer? I can certainly give it a try. It would be extra useful if it included any histogram functionality. I've been using a combination of various synthetic wakeup and load scripts and measuring the received bandwidth / wakeup latency. They have not succeeded in reproducing the starvation or poor latency observed by Mike above however. (Although I've pulled a box to try reproducing his exact conditions [ e.g. user environment ] on Monday). -- 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/