Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 15:35:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net> To: Kevin Oberman <oberman@es.net> Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-src@freebsd.org, Jeff Roberson <jeff@freebsd.org>, cvs-all@freebsd.org, Ben Kaduk <minimarmot@gmail.com>, Garance A Drosehn <gad@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern sched_ule.c Message-ID: <20070930153430.U583@10.0.0.1> In-Reply-To: <20070930040318.094E345018@ptavv.es.net> References: <20070930040318.094E345018@ptavv.es.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 29 Sep 2007, Kevin Oberman wrote: >> Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 23:25:08 -0400 >> From: "Ben Kaduk" <minimarmot@gmail.com> >> Sender: owner-cvs-all@freebsd.org >> >> On 9/29/07, Garance A Drosehn <gad@freebsd.org> wrote: >>> At 4:39 PM +0000 9/27/07, Jeff Roberson wrote: >>>> >>>> Modified files: >>>> sys/kern sched_ule.c >>>> Log: >>>> - ... >>>> - Assert that we're not trying to compile ULE on an unsupported >>>> architecture. To date, I believe only i386 and amd64 have >>>> implemented the third cpu switch argument required. >>>> >>>> Approved by: re >>> >>> Does this mean that I should not switch to ULE on my single-CPU PowerPC >>> mini-Mac? >>> >> >> I was under the impression that BSD is preferred to ULE for single-processor >> systems, irregardless of the processor architecture. > > YMMV, but ULE seems to generally work better then 4BSD for interactive > uniprocessor systems. The preferred scheduler for uniprocessor servers > is less clear, but many test have shown ULE does better for those > systems in the majority of cases. I feel it's safe to say desktop behavior on UP is definitely superior. I think there is no significant difference on UP between 4BSD and ULE except perhaps in context switching microbenchmarks where ULE falls behind. > > While I believe the plan is that 4BSD be in GENERIC in 7.0, but I > suspect ULE (which may still need optimizing to do in a few areas) will > soon be the standard scheduler for all 386 and amd64 systems. I'm not sure if the plan is settled yet, however you're probably right. > > Jeff has done quite a job on ULE. Thanks, Jeff > -- > R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer > Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) > Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) > E-mail: oberman@es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634 > Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4 EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751 >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070930153430.U583>