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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).