Re: [PATCH]O18int

[Wiktor Wodecki <wodecki@gmx.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1907 bytes --]

On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 11:51:16PM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Friday 22 August 2003 23:41, Wiktor Wodecki wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 10:31:20PM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > Content-Description: clearsigned data
> >
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > > Hash: SHA1
> > >
> > > Here is a small patchlet.
> > >
> > > It is possible tasks were getting more sleep_avg credit on requeuing than
> > > they could burn off while running so I've removed the on runqueue bonus
> > > to requeuing task.
> > >
> > > Note this applies onto O16.3 or 2.6.0-test3-mm3 as O17 was dropped.
> > >
> > > This patch is also available here along with a patch against 2.6.0-test3:
> > > http://kernel.kolivas.org/2.5
> > >
> > > Con
> >
> > this patch still makes my xmms skip on light io load (untar kernel
> > source, open lkml mailbox folder) while opening mozilla. Even after
> > mozilla is there xmms is still skipping. Processes take ages to spawn.
> > And no, I'm not in swap. A 'su -'is taking 10 seconds to procceed.
> > Same applies when rm -Rf'ing a kernel tree.
> > Here is some more data for the curious:
> 
> > note the load of 11. I can even get it to 30 while doing 3 tar xf
> > bla.tar simultanously.
> 
> Complete mystery.
> >
> > I'm going to fetch some fish in the next two weeks in poland, so I will
> > not be able to do any more testing from sunday on. Happy coding (while I
> > stick to O10 *g*)
> 
> Thanks for comments. ]
> 
> There it is again; the reference to darn O10. Hrm. One question before your 
> holiday; your O10 kernel is it the same kernel tree or a different/newere 
> one? I'm looking to blame something else here I know but I need to know; this 
> just doesn't hold with any testing here.

well, I run O10 on top of test2, since I didn't need any patches from
test3 I didn't rediff it.

-- 
Regards,

Wiktor Wodecki

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]