|
|
Log in / Subscribe / Register

BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements

BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements

Posted Sep 9, 2009 11:50 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304)
In reply to: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements by mingo
Parent article: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements

I thought CONFIG_LATENCYTOP had horrible effects on the task_struct size and people were being encouraged to *disable* it as a result?

to post comments

BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements

Posted Sep 10, 2009 9:56 UTC (Thu) by mingo (subscriber, #31122) [Link]

It shouldnt have too big cost unless you are really RAM constrained. (read running: a 32 MB system or so) So it's a nice tool if you want to see a general categorization of latency sources in your system.

latencytop is certainly useful enough so that several distributions enable it by default. It has size impact on task struct but otherwise the runtime cost should be near zero.


Copyright © 2026, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds