From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754487AbXGQEXS (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jul 2007 00:23:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751410AbXGQEXG (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jul 2007 00:23:06 -0400 Received: from mail.tmr.com ([64.65.253.246]:41855 "EHLO gaimboi.tmr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750914AbXGQEXF (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jul 2007 00:23:05 -0400 Message-ID: <469C4418.4090207@tmr.com> Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 00:22:48 -0400 From: Bill Davidsen Organization: TMR Associates Inc, Schenectady NY User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.8) Gecko/20061105 SeaMonkey/1.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ingo Molnar CC: Chuck Ebbert , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , Ian Kent Subject: Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v19 References: <20070706173319.GA2356@elte.hu> <1184054902.12336.19.camel@Homer.simpson.net> <469512C1.6090406@tmr.com> <20070711205556.GA27266@elte.hu> <4697EC49.4070303@tmr.com> <469BE462.9030004@redhat.com> <20070716215541.GA27171@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: <20070716215541.GA27171@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Chuck Ebbert 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 CTO TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979