An evaluation of the Linux kernel performance may require several cycles of running the benchmarks, conducting an analysis of the results to identify performance and scalability bottlenecks, addressing any bottlenecks by integrating patches into the Linux kernel and running the benchmark again. The patches can be obtained by finding existing patches in the OSC or by developing new patches, as a performance team member, in close collaboration with the members of the Linux kernel development team or OSC). There is a set of criteria for determining when Linux is "good enough" and we end this process.
First, if we have met our targets and we do not have any outstanding Linux kernel issues to address for the specific benchmark that would significantly improve its performance, we assert that Linux is "good enough" and move on to other issues. Second, if we go through several cycles of performance analysis and still have outstanding bottlenecks, then we consider the tradeoffs between the development costs of continuing the process and the benefits of any additional performance gains. If the development costs are too high, relative to any potential performance improvements, we discontinue our analysis and articulate the rationale appropriately.
In both cases, we then review all of the additional outstanding Linux kernel-related issues we want to address, make an assessment of appropriate benchmarks that may be used to address these kernel component issues, examine any data we may have on the issue, and make a decision to conduct an analysis of the kernel component (or collection of components) based upon this collective information.