Re: On schedulers

On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, Jeff Roberson wrote:

On Thu, 2 Aug 2007, Jeff Roberson wrote:

On Thu, 2 Aug 2007, Niki Denev wrote:

Both idle and glxgears are run as normal user.

Can you tell me what % cpu is going to each process during this time? These results are surprising. For workloads like this ULE should essentially implement a 'fair' scheduling policy. However, so should 4BSD. So I'm not yet sure why the slowdown wouldn't be relative to the number of running threads. Also, 'vmstat 1' output would be useful.

I'm glad this discussion is happening, but:

- I wasn't really interested in 3D performance, but mostly in if there's theoretical modelling of how ULE should perform, and/or its comparison to Linux (e.g. elaboration of what 'fair' means for ULE).
- People who know (meaning those who work with or develop X11) say that glxgears is awful for testing graphical performance. I don't know exactly why is that, but I've seen widely varying results from glxgears on related mailing lists that seem to confirm this. From personal experience I've seen glxgears "topping out" with much idle CPU left, both extremely high and extremely low results from it on hardware that shouldn't behave like that, so I agree with this. Quake should be much better for benchmarking :)

_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"

Relevant Pages

  • Re: On schedulers
    ... I wasn't really interested in 3D performance, but mostly in if there's theoretical modelling of how ULE should perform, and/or its comparison to Linux. ... I don't know exactly why is that, but I've seen widely varying results from glxgears on related mailing lists that seem to confirm this. ... From personal experience I've seen glxgears "topping out" with much idle CPU left, both extremely high and extremely low results from it on hardware that shouldn't behave like that, so I agree with this. ... I will try to run the same test again, but with quake this week if time permits. ...
    (freebsd-arch)
  • Re: 4BSD/ULE numbers...
    ... September 2005 00:37 CEST schrieb David Xu: ... > advantage is ULE can be HTT friendly if it make it correctly, ... > for example physical / logical CPU balance, ... machines, where it's probably already superior, and I don't really care ...
    (freebsd-current)
  • Re: ULE 2.0
    ... After a considerable vacation from ULE I have come back to address some long standing concerns. ... See %cpu in top. ... and destroy a partition, root can add cpu to the partition or remove ... I feel that working within the framework of the 4BSD scheduler would limit what we can do with these more complex scheduling problems. ...
    (freebsd-current)
  • Re: HEADS UP: ULE is the default scheduler now
    ... Jeff, were you able to clear up the use of ULE on a single CPU machine ... >> ULE has entered into its probationary period as the default scheduler. ... interactivity is reported to be better in many ...
    (freebsd-current)
  • Re: [ANNOUNCE] RSDL completely fair starvation free interactive cpu scheduler
    ... input with glxgears running. ... You're hitting a nasty udev bug here that is unrelated to the cpu ... In general I've found once the kernel did something funny on boot that not ... scheduler bug 72fd4a35a824331d7a0f4168d7576502d95d34b3 [PATCH] Numerous ...
    (Linux-Kernel)