Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1367788
| From | Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFCv7 PATCH 00/10] sched: scheduler-driven CPU frequency selection |
| Date | 2016-03-31 06:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <riC5I-7Ho-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <r59Xz-6rQ-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <rijFN-2CP-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <rizKx-5GC-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Hi Steve, On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 06:35:23PM -0700, Steve Muckle wrote: > This series was dropped in favor of Rafael's schedutil. But on the > chance that you're still curious about the test setup used to quantify > the series I'll explain below. I will catch up and learn both. > These results are meant to show how the governors perform across varying > workload intensities and periodicities. Higher overhead (OH) numbers > indicate that the completion times of each period of the workload were > closer to what they would be when run at fmin (100% overhead would be as > slow as fmin, 0% overhead would be as fast as fmax). And as described > above, overruns (OR) indicate that the governor was not responsive > enough to finish the work in each period of the workload. > > These are just performance metrics so they only tell half the story. > Power is not factored in at all. > > This provides a quick sanity check that the governor under test (in this > case, the now defunct schedfreq, or sched for short) performs similarly > to two of the most commonly used governors, ondemand and interactive, in > steady state periodic workloads. In the data above sched looks good for > the most part with the second test case being the biggest exception. Yes, it is indeed a quick sanity check. Thanks, Yuyang
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [RFCv7 PATCH 00/10] sched: scheduler-driven CPU frequency selection Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@intel.com> - 2016-03-30 10:30 +0200
Re: [RFCv7 PATCH 00/10] sched: scheduler-driven CPU frequency selection Steve Muckle <steve.muckle@linaro.org> - 2016-03-31 03:40 +0200
Re: [RFCv7 PATCH 00/10] sched: scheduler-driven CPU frequency selection Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@intel.com> - 2016-03-31 06:10 +0200
csiph-web