public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Shawn Starr <Shawn.Starr@Home.net>
To: Shawn Starr <Shawn.Starr@Home.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <andrewm@uow.edu.au>, Chris Mason <mason@suse.com>,
	Gregory Maxwell <greg@linuxpower.cx>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.4.x and 2.4.1-preX - Higher latency then 2.2.xkernels?
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 21:55:51 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3A738A36.F6294623@Home.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <186870000.980100593@tiny> <3A6B6FDE.93AF69CC@Home.net> <3A72820A.1488BDC@uow.edu.au> <3A7280F5.F122FE35@Home.com>

Andrew, the patch HAS made a difference. For example, while untaring glibc-2.2.1.tar.gz the
system was not sluggish (mouse movements in X) etc.

Seems to be a go for latency improvements on this system.

Shawn Starr wrote:

> Applying now.
>
> Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > Shawn,
> >
> > I've pretty much completed the low-latency patch against reiserfs.
> > It seems to be a little more latency-prone than ext2, but under normal
> > workloads it's not significant.  The worst-case is 100 milliseconds,
> > but that's when you're doing insane things to it.
> >
> > You may care to apply http://www.uow.edu.au/~andrewm/linux/2.4.1-pre10-low-latency.patch
> > against 2.4.1-pre10 and see if it "feels" different.  I'd be surprised
> > if it does, but the result would be interresting.
> >
> > Note that the low-latency capability must be enabled under the
> > "Processor type and features" menu, and if you also enable the
> > low-latency sysctl option, you'll need to
> >
> >         echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/lowlatency
> >
> > to make it happen.  Creature feep :)

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  reply	other threads:[~2001-01-28  2:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-01-20 19:50 Kernel 2.4.x and 2.4.1-preX - Higher latency then 2.2.x kernels? Shawn Starr
2001-01-20 19:59 ` Gregory Maxwell
2001-01-20 20:16   ` Shawn Starr
2001-01-21 18:09   ` Chris Mason
2001-01-21 23:25     ` Kernel 2.4.x and 2.4.1-preX - Higher latency then 2.2.xkernels? Shawn Starr
2001-01-27  8:08       ` Andrew Morton
2001-01-27  8:04         ` Shawn Starr
2001-01-28  2:55           ` Shawn Starr [this message]
2001-01-28  3:29             ` Andrew Morton
2001-01-28  3:59               ` Shawn Starr
2001-01-28 19:17               ` Chris Mason
2001-01-29  0:33                 ` Shawn Starr
2001-01-28 11:46             ` Andrew Morton
2001-01-28 21:53               ` Shawn Starr

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=3A738A36.F6294623@Home.net \
    --to=shawn.starr@home.net \
    --cc=Shawn.Starr@Home.com \
    --cc=andrewm@uow.edu.au \
    --cc=greg@linuxpower.cx \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mason@suse.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