From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932812AbVHTDEV (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Aug 2005 23:04:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932813AbVHTDEV (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Aug 2005 23:04:21 -0400 Received: from viper.oldcity.dca.net ([216.158.38.4]:22979 "HELO viper.oldcity.dca.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S932812AbVHTDEV (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Aug 2005 23:04:21 -0400 Subject: Re: Schedulers benchmark - Was: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] PlugSched-5.2.4 for 2.6.12 and 2.6.13-rc6 From: Lee Revell To: Con Kolivas Cc: Peter Williams , Michal Piotrowski , LKML In-Reply-To: <200508201031.59981.kernel@kolivas.org> References: <43001E18.8020707@bigpond.net.au> <200508191436.42881.kernel@kolivas.org> <1124482411.25424.49.camel@mindpipe> <200508201031.59981.kernel@kolivas.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 23:04:18 -0400 Message-Id: <1124507059.25916.25.camel@mindpipe> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.3.7 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2005-08-20 at 10:31 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote: > On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 06:13, Lee Revell wrote: > > > > I agree that tweaking the scheduler is probably pointless, as long as X > > is burning gazillions of CPU cycles redrawing things that don't need to > > be redrawn. > > > > Then again even the OSX scheduler has hooks for the GUI. Presumably > > they concluded that the desktop responsiveness problem could not be > > adequately solved within the framework of a general purpose UNIX > > scheduler. > > It's an X problem and it's being fixed. Get over it, we're not tuning the > scheduler for a broken app. I wasn't saying it would be a smart thing to do, the OSX thing is interesting that's all. I think we're in violent agreement about the X problem, do you have a link to any specific work on this (off list)? Lee