Re: The idea about scheduler test module(STM)

On 10/26/2012 10:27 AM, Charles Wang wrote: > Yes, it's a new way to do scheduler test. But why use kernel > threads? The info, total time, run time, wait time, preempt number, all > can be collected from tasks' sched info from /proc/pid/sched and > /proc/pid/stat. That's right, next version's

Re: The idea about scheduler test module(STM)

Yes, it's a new way to do scheduler test. But why use kernel threads? The info, total time, run time, wait time, preempt number, all can be collected from tasks' sched info from /proc/pid/sched and /proc/pid/stat. I don't understand clearly about "pure scheduler performance" here. In order to

Re: The idea about scheduler test module(STM)

Yes, it's a new way to do scheduler test. But why use kernel threads? The info, total time, run time, wait time, preempt number, all can be collected from tasks' sched info from /proc/pid/sched and /proc/pid/stat. I don't understand clearly about pure scheduler performance here. In order to

Re: The idea about scheduler test module(STM)

On 10/26/2012 10:27 AM, Charles Wang wrote: Yes, it's a new way to do scheduler test. But why use kernel threads? The info, total time, run time, wait time, preempt number, all can be collected from tasks' sched info from /proc/pid/sched and /proc/pid/stat. That's right, next version's STM

The idea about scheduler test module(STM)

Hi, Folks Charles has raised a problem that we don't have any tool yet for testing the scheduler with out any disturb from other subsystem, and I also found it's hard to test scheduler optimize patch, since the improvement could be easily eaten by other subsystem like IO. So Let's check the

The idea about scheduler test module(STM)

Hi, Folks Charles has raised a problem that we don't have any tool yet for testing the scheduler with out any disturb from other subsystem, and I also found it's hard to test scheduler optimize patch, since the improvement could be easily eaten by other subsystem like IO. So Let's check the