On Tue, 9 Sep 2003 12:16, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Tue, 9 Sep 2003 12:10, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Tue, 9 Sep 2003 08:56, Andrew Morton wrote:Correction sorry: These changes were due to
Steven Pratt <slpratt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Interestingly enough this drops the volano results the same proportion as
For specjbb things are looking good from a throughput point of view.hmm, thanks.
...
Volanomark, on the other hand is still off by quite a bit from test4
stock
I'm not sure that volanomark is very representative of any real-world
thing.
...Could we please see test5 versus test5 plus Andrew's patch?
If thre is any particular patch/tree combination you would like me to
try out, please let me know and I will see if I can get the results
for you.
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.0-tes
t4 /2 .6.0-test4-mm6/broken-out/sched-CAN_MIGRATE_TASK-fix.patch
and if you have time, also test5 plus sched-CAN_MIGRATE_TASK-fix.patch
plus
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.0-tes
t4 /2
.6.0-test4-mm6/broken-out/sched-balance-fix-2.6.0-test3-mm3-A0.patch
Ingo's A3 patch. 11000 ->10400 throughput with same idle, but more
schedule().
I've posted some results for test5 volano and test5-A0 here:
http://kernel.kolivas.org/2.5/volano
More testing underway.
sched-CAN_MIGRATE_TASK-fix.patch and the test results say
volano-results-2.6.0-test5-A0-*
Further testing shows the patch: sched-balance-fix-2.6.0-test3-mm3-A0.patch to have no effect on volano results by itself.