Hi, Jeff Roberson wrote: > Can you please try the enclosed patch and tell me if it addresses your > problem? I've tested with SCHED_4BSD and SCHED_ULE. 7-CURRENT, SCHED_4BSD, HZ=100: 81.14 real 80.32 user 0.00 sys 80.85 real 80.03 user 0.00 sys 82.37 real 81.54 user 0.00 sys 7-CURRENT, SCHED_4BSD, HZ=1000: 3.06 real 2.84 user 0.00 sys 3.08 real 2.87 user 0.00 sys 3.00 real 2.80 user 0.01 sys 7-CURRENT, SCHED_ULE, HZ=100: 9.03 real 8.93 user 0.00 sys 1.68 real 1.67 user 0.00 sys 9.13 real 9.04 user 0.00 sys 7-CURRENT, SCHED_ULE, HZ=1000: 4.49 real 4.38 user 0.00 sys 4.57 real 4.48 user 0.00 sys 4.78 real 4.67 user 0.01 sys 6.2-RELEASE, SCHED_4BSD, HZ=100: 0.55 real 0.55 user 0.00 sys 0.54 real 0.54 user 0.00 sys 0.60 real 0.60 user 0.00 sys 6.2-RELEASE, SCHED_4BSD, HZ=1000: 0.29 real 0.29 user 0.00 sys 0.27 real 0.26 user 0.00 sys 0.28 real 0.28 user 0.00 sys I picked up 3 medians of 5 tests since durations are not stable on SCHED_ULE. SCHED_ULE is much faster than before, but still slower than 6.2-RELEASE. SCHED_4BSD is still very slow with small HZ. Thanks, -- NIIMI SatoshiReceived on Tue Oct 02 2007 - 10:52:42 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:18 UTC