Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v19

[Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>]

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