Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753216Ab0LGLdc (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Dec 2010 06:33:32 -0500 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([74.125.121.35]:56935 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752292Ab0LGLdb convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Dec 2010 06:33:31 -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=waHXZphzQHAkkda+ho2JSGQtchgOckKYNp2guP0Bes/0tQ7a28BlgQleDZlANfxUTf UN5gpwfcdOJcxiCzijjA== 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: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 03:32:56 -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: 1953 Lines: 46 Desktop hardware came in today and I can now reproduce the issues Mike's been seeing; tuning in progress. On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 9:11 PM, Paul Turner wrote: > 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/