Hi Viresh,
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 12:12 PM, Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org wrote:
On 05-01-18, 16:13, Viresh Kumar wrote:
Hello,
I did some comparisons of Pelt and Walt and have some very interesting performance results that I wanted to share with all of you. I haven't got any power numbers as I don't have setup for that.
I ran the janbench tests from sched-evaluation-full.yaml agenda (attached).
Results updated in: https://goo.gl/eCx4Pk
Average across 30 iterations:
+-----------------+---------+--------+----------------------+ | Test | Pelt(8)| Walt | Pelt Improvement % | +-----------------+---------+--------+----------------------+ | list_view | 8 | 17 | 52.94 | | | | | | | image_list_view | 11 | 24 | 54.17 | | | | | | | shadow_grid | 18 | 27 | 33.33 | | | | | | | low_hitrate_text| 39 | 45 | 13.33 | | | | | | | edit_text | 5 | 7 | 28.57 | | | | | | +-----------------+---------+--------+----------------------+
--
What is the WALT window size (walt_ravg_window) in your setup? I see it is 20 msec here [1], but just want to double confirm. Reducing WALT window size makes it more responsive. Have you tried with different window size like 10 msec?
[1] https://git.linaro.org/people/vireshk/mylinux.git/tree/kernel/sched/walt.c?h...
-- Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project