From: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
To: Tom Sightler <ttsig@tuxyturvy.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Problems caused by scheduler tweaks in 2.6.0-test6?
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2003 19:50:44 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200310041950.44011.kernel@kolivas.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3F7E8EC0.7080008@cyberone.com.au>
On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 19:11, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Did you see this Con?
>
> By the way Tom, I have my scheduler patch available for test6 here:
> http://www.kerneltrap.org/~npiggin/v15a/sched-rollup-v15a-260t6.gz
>
> Tom Sightler wrote:
> >Hi All,
> >
> >Over the last few months I have tested many different scheduler tweaks
> >mostly by testing the -mm kernels and also by applying Nick's patches
> >against vanilla kernels. Up until recently I have been very happy with
> >2.6.0-test5 with Nick's scheduler patches.
> >
> >Then I decided to try 2.6.0-test6 which seems to include a lot of Con's
> >work and, while overall this seems nice, I'm having two relatively
> >serious side effects that seem to be related to this inclusion.
> >
> >1. VMware performance varies wildly. I can't put my finger on this
> >exact issue, but I have found as way to repeatably trigger bad
> >performance. When running VMware in fullscreen mode, enable window
> >animation and repeatedly minimize/maximize a window. Under 2.4.x and
> >2.6.0-test5 w/Nick's patches this process runs reasonably smooth,
> >although noticably slower than native speed. With stock 2.6.0-test6
> >after only a few seconds the minimize/maximize animiation slows to a
> >complete crawl, take 20+ seconds to complete the minimize opertaion.
> >I've tried tuning VMware with priorities but no luck.
> >
> >2. I also use Wine to run various Windows programs on occasion,
> >particularly Outlook 2000 (mainly when attempting to help other running
> >this application on Windows). The program runs fine, but always hangs
> >on exit. I didn't originally think this was related to the scheduler,
> >but interestingly, after applying Nick's patches to 2.6.0-test6, which
> >back out Con's changes, this problem goes away.
> >
> >Is there any help out there for these type of issues? I know that many
> >people seem to think these changes make life better, and I'll admidt
> >that playing MP3's and DVD's is better with these changes, but I'd
> >rather have my system preform well at other tasks. I would think having
> >a way to turn off all the fancy interactivity detection would be ideal
> >but there always seems to be opposition to adding tuning knobs.
> >
Please send a rundown of what top shows during these occurrences, and please
define "hangs". I can't see how the scheduler tweaks can bring the machine
down.
Con
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-10-04 9:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-10-03 13:38 Problems caused by scheduler tweaks in 2.6.0-test6? Tom Sightler
2003-10-04 9:11 ` Nick Piggin
2003-10-04 9:50 ` Con Kolivas [this message]
2003-10-04 9:52 ` Nick Piggin
2003-10-05 2:45 ` Tom Sightler
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=200310041950.44011.kernel@kolivas.org \
--to=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ttsig@tuxyturvy.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox