Re: [interbench numbers] Re: interactive task starvation
From: Con Kolivas
Date: Thu Mar 23 2006 - 19:18:35 EST
On Thursday 23 March 2006 22:07, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> Nothing conclusive. Some of the difference may be because interbench
> has a dependency on the idle sleep path popping tasks in a prio 16
> instead of 18. Some of it may be because I'm not restricting IO, doing
> that makes a bit of difference. Some of it is definitely plain old
Thanks for those! Just a clarification please
I assume 2.6.16-rc6-mm2 ?
> throttle patches with throttling disabled
With your full patchset but no throttling enabled?
> minus idle sleep
Full patchset -throttling-idlesleep ?
> minus don't restrict IO
Full patchset -throttling-idlesleep-restrictio ?
Can you please email the latest separate patches so we can see them in
isolation? I promise I won't ask for any more interbench numbers any time
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/