Re: 2.6.0-test6 scheduler goodness

[Andi Kleen]

David B Harris <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> 4) In either 2.6.0-test5, or 2.6.0-test6 (I'm using 2.6.0-test6, I
> skipped test5), responsiveness was magically fixed for my workload case.
> I still have lower throughput, apparently (big compiles and whatnot take
> about 20% longer), but I recently got a CPU upgrade so I don't

Everything CPU bound should run a few percent slower on 2.6 because
it uses HZ=1000. You could recompile with HZ=100 and see if that fixes
that (just change HZ to 100 in asm/param.h)

20% sounds a big high just for HZ degradation though.

-Andi

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/