On Wed, 2017-11-08 at 10:27 +0100, Felix Fietkau wrote: > On 2017-11-08 07:18, John Crispin wrote: > > j > > > > > > On 07/11/17 19:41, Rosen Penev wrote: > > > most users don't have multithreaded workloads though. > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Dave Taht <d...@taht.net> wrote: > > > > I happen to like deadline schedulers, and at least from a > > > > kernel > > > > perspective, we have a very large set of multithreaded > > > > workloads. > > > > > > > > So I would not make this change without a very serious set of > > > > benchmarks > > > > under load showing it makes a difference. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Lede-dev mailing list > > > Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org > > > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev > > > > I fully agree with dave on this one. changing the default scheduler > > is > > not a small change. please provide benchmarks done on typical > > router HW > > if you would like to see this getting merged. As Felix said, it's just the I/O scheduler. I'm a bit busy for benchmarks at this time but I have been using noop for a while now and have noticed no noticeable regressions. > > It's just the I/O scheduler, not the CPU one. It will have zero > impact > on typical router workloads. The only thing that might get slower is > heavy multi-threaded disk I/O, which is probably an extremely rare > occurence on LEDE. Also, at least according to that linked phoronix > benchmark, even on some of these workloads, no-op can be competitive > ;) > > - Felix
_______________________________________________ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
