From: Willy Tarreau <willy@w.ods.org>
To: Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>
Cc: Lincoln Dale <ltd@cisco.com>, Soeren Sonnenburg <kernel@nn7.de>,
Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>,
Mark Hahn <hahn@physics.mcmaster.ca>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
gillb4@telusplanet.net
Subject: Nicks's scheduler's OK [was Re: xterm scrolling speed - scheduling weirdness in 2.6 ?!]
Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 12:46:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040104114635.GA14433@alpha.home.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3FF7DA24.40802@cyberone.com.au>
On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 08:17:24PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
> Or, out of interest, an alternate scheduler?
>
> http://www.kerneltrap.org/~npiggin/w29p2.gz
> (applies 2.6.1-rc1-mm1, please renice X to -10 or so)
Nick's scheduler seems rather interesting. X is nearly insensible to renice
as it was in 2.4. I cannot get a slow scrolling anymore except with xterm +j.
And the differences in time between renice -15 and renice +10 are about 5%,
which is perfectly acceptable to me. I got back the 2.4 behaviour (= a usable
desktop). Now recompiling Con's "noint" patch on 2.6.0 for reference.
Cheers,
Willy
1) X not reniced.
=================
w29p2$ time xterm -e seq 1 5000
real 0m0.487s
user 0m0.244s
sys 0m0.075s
w29p2$ time xterm -e sh -c "ls -l incoming tmp"
real 0m1.000s
user 0m0.491s
sys 0m0.106s
2) Now renicing X to -10 as suggested by Nick
=============================================
w29p2$ time xterm -e sh -c "ls -l incoming tmp"
real 0m0.998s
user 0m0.476s
sys 0m0.126s
w29p2$ time xterm -e seq 1 5000
real 0m0.420s
user 0m0.276s
sys 0m0.082s
3) Now renicing X to +10 to compare with my previous tests
==========================================================
w29p2$ time xterm -e seq 1 5000
real 0m0.528s
user 0m0.282s
sys 0m0.056s
w29p2$ time xterm -e sh -c "ls -l incoming tmp"
real 0m0.967s
user 0m0.498s
sys 0m0.111s
w29p2$ time find incoming tmp |wc -l
204276
real 0m0.937s
user 0m0.299s
sys 0m0.593s
w29p2$ time xterm -e sh -c "find incoming tmp"
real 0m21.368s
user 0m5.838s
sys 0m1.341s
top - 12:31:23 up 11 min, 6 users, load average: 0.59, 0.68, 0.39
Tasks: 61 total, 2 running, 59 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
Cpu(s): 29.1% user, 6.8% system, 64.1% nice, 0.0% idle, 0.0% IO-wait
Mem: 515248k total, 231160k used, 284088k free, 99172k buffers
Swap: 265064k total, 0k used, 265064k free, 45328k cached
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ Command
302 root 50 10 21500 11m 11m R 63.9 2.3 1:41.67 X
475 root 37 0 4764 2660 3844 S 31.0 0.5 0:01.68 xterm
476 willy 39 0 1420 540 1252 S 3.9 0.1 0:00.23 find
1 root 25 0 348 192 316 S 0.0 0.0 0:05.06 init
2 root 41 19 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 ksoftirqd/0
3 root 12 -10 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.20 events/0
4 root 16 -10 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.03 kblockd/0
4) Same with renice -15 :
=========================
w29p2$ time xterm -e sh -c "find incoming tmp"
real 0m19.147s
user 0m5.085s
sys 0m1.238s
top - 12:33:33 up 13 min, 6 users, load average: 0.65, 0.68, 0.42
Tasks: 61 total, 4 running, 57 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
Cpu(s): 93.1% user, 6.9% system, 0.0% nice, 0.0% idle, 0.0% IO-wait
Mem: 515248k total, 233464k used, 281784k free, 99540k buffers
Swap: 265064k total, 0k used, 265064k free, 45992k cached
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ Command
302 root 24 -15 21500 11m 11m R 66.2 2.3 2:08.25 X
482 root 40 0 4764 2660 3844 R 29.2 0.5 0:01.50 xterm
483 willy 37 0 1420 540 1252 R 4.9 0.1 0:00.25 find
1 root 26 0 348 192 316 S 0.0 0.0 0:05.06 init
2 root 41 19 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 ksoftirqd/0
3 root 12 -10 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.21 events/0
4 root 15 -10 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.03 kblockd/0
5 root 39 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 pdflush
6 root 23 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 pdflush
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-04 11:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.44.0401031439060.24942-100000@coffee.psychology.mcmaster.ca>
2004-01-03 20:19 ` xterm scrolling speed - scheduling weirdness in 2.6 ?! Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-03 21:00 ` Con Kolivas
2004-01-03 21:10 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-03 21:15 ` Con Kolivas
2004-01-03 23:35 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-01-04 0:11 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-04 1:42 ` Con Kolivas
2004-01-04 3:32 ` Tim Connors
2004-01-04 5:58 ` Con Kolivas
2004-01-06 1:09 ` Peter Osterlund
2004-01-06 1:37 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-06 2:28 ` Peter Osterlund
2004-01-06 2:50 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-06 6:27 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-05 22:25 ` Bryan Whitehead
2004-01-04 8:09 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-04 8:49 ` Con Kolivas
2004-01-04 11:13 ` Martin Schlemmer
2004-01-04 11:24 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-04 12:45 ` Con Kolivas
2004-01-04 14:42 ` Martin Schlemmer
2004-01-04 18:40 ` mikeg
2004-01-04 22:58 ` szonyi calin
2004-01-04 23:33 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-01-04 23:44 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2004-01-04 23:47 ` Mike Fedyk
2004-01-05 8:39 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-05 20:38 ` Martin Schlemmer
2004-01-05 9:18 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-05 17:20 ` Martin Schlemmer
2004-01-05 17:21 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-01-05 9:50 ` Kenneth Johansson
2004-01-05 10:17 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-04-02 18:22 ` solved (was Re: xterm scrolling speed - scheduling weirdness in 2.6 ?!) Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-04-03 5:35 ` Tim Connors
2004-04-03 6:06 ` Tim Connors
2004-04-03 14:11 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-01-05 8:26 ` xterm scrolling speed - scheduling weirdness in 2.6 ?! Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-04 8:54 ` Lincoln Dale
2004-01-04 9:17 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-04 10:24 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-04 11:12 ` Mike Fedyk
2004-01-04 11:17 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-04 11:20 ` Mike Fedyk
2004-01-04 11:19 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-01-05 0:48 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-04 11:46 ` Willy Tarreau [this message]
2004-01-04 12:07 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-01-05 0:51 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-05 18:37 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-01-06 0:33 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-04 10:11 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-05 10:31 ` venom
2004-01-03 21:18 ` Willy Tarreau
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040104114635.GA14433@alpha.home.local \
--to=willy@w.ods.org \
--cc=gillb4@telusplanet.net \
--cc=hahn@physics.mcmaster.ca \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=kernel@nn7.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ltd@cisco.com \
--cc=piggin@cyberone.com.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.