Auto-Adaptive scheduler and semaphore patch ( 2.2.14 ) ...

[Davide Libenzi]

On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, David Lang wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> I think I was unclear again.
> 
> I was not meaning that you should create a special benchmark.
> I was meaning that you should run two passes for the benchmark you are
> using.
> 
> pass 1. standard kernel (or standard kernel with re-ordering patch
> applied)
> 
> pass 2 new scheduler (or new scheduler with re-ordering patch applied)
> 
> The new scheduler for pass 2 should not be the one that switched between
> the two algorithms, it should be just the new algorithm.

Clear.

> 
> After you can tell where the performance lines cross then you can do a
> pass 3 that dynamicly switches between the two and see how much that
> suffers compared to pass 1 (it _will_ suffer becouse you have to run the
> test to see if you should switch to the new algorithm)`

It ia done only when scheduler falls into the recharge loop, therefore one
time on several schedules if the processes are interrupted during their cycle,
or if they're not interrupted, one time at every 420 ms.
This is the reason that induce me to thimk that the switch will have a very
low cost.


Davide.

-- 
All this stuff is IMVHO



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