2 ms·
A number of benchmarks are mentioned in the original thread on LKML discussing this scheduler: http://www.pubbs.net/kernel/200909/76667/ http://www.pubbs.net/ke
by Confusion 17y ago
A number of benchmarks are mentioned in the original thread on LKML discussing this scheduler: http://www.pubbs.net/kernel/200909/76667/ http://www.pubbs.net/kernel/200909/76667/
At some point in the discussion, someone introduces a benchmark that clearly reproduces a problem with the current CFS scheduler. I think that perfectly illustrates what you are looking for (unfortunately, I have to run and can't pinpoint the exact post in this timeframe).
- nailer 17y agoQuite an interesting read. Did anyone else fidn it worrying that Ingo Molnar attempted to benchmark a scheduler that aims for interactive response using: * kernel build * pipe * messaging performance * OLTP performance And then wonders why he doesn't get an improvement? One of the other posters puts it perfectly: "Do you know what a normal desktop PC looks like? No, a more realistic question based on what you chose to benchmark to prove your point would be: Do you know what normal people actually do on them?" In answer to the parent poster, see Nikos Chantziaras' posts.