Davide Libenzi wrote:
> This is a pure switching time test.
> It is a _real_ switching test, that can be used to test switching times
> under _certain_ RQ loads :
>
> [...]
>
> I _want_ this behaviour coz I _want_ a measure of clean switching times by
> keeping
> cache issues ot of the test.
>
> Anyway adding a cache footprint into the two cases will add a constant term
> that minimize even more the percent result.
It's nice that switching times under large RQ loads is improved, when
there is no cache issue.
But it's not important. It's not relevant.
Real world problems do not have that kind of load. Real world problems
_do_ have cache issues.
The cache issue is so important for real applications that optimising
the scheduler under unusual RQ loads isn't worth doing.
At least, I believe that is the view being presented by Larry McVoy.
have a nice day,
-- Jamie
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 31 2000 - 21:00:19 EST