Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v19

Bill Davidsen
2007-07-17T04:23:18Z

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
>> On 07/13/2007 05:19 PM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
>>
>>> I should really go back to 2.6.21.6, 2.6.22 has many bizarre behaviors
>>> with FC6. Automount starts taking 30% of CPU (unused at the moment)
>>>
>> Can you confirm whether CFS is involved, i.e. does it spin like that
>> even without the CFS patch applied?
>>
>
>
I will try that, but not until Tuesday night. I've been here too long
today and have an out-of-state meeting tomorrow. I'll take a look after
dinner. Note that the latest 2.6.21 with cfs-v19 doesn't have any
problems of any nature, other than suspend to RAM not working, and I may
have the config wrong. Runs really well otherwise, but I'll test drive
2.6.22 w/o the patch.

> hmmm .... could you take out the kernel/time.c (sys_time()) changes from
> the CFS patch, does that solve the automount issue? If yes, could
> someone take a look at automount and check whether it makes use of
> time(2) and whether it combines it with finer grained time sources?
>
>
Will do.

--
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
CTO TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979