* Gene Heskett <[email protected]> wrote:
> To be expected, there are after all, only so many cpu cycles to go
> around. Here I sit, running 2.6.21-rc6 ATM, and since there is not an
> SD patch that applies cleanly to rc6, I am back to typing half or more
> of a sentence blind while I answer a posting such as this because of x
> starvation while kmail is sorting incoming stuff.
it would be really nice to analyze this. Does the latest -rt patch boot
on your box so that we could trace this regression? (I can send you a
standalone tracing patch if it doesnt.) IIRC you reported that one of
the early patches from Mike made your system behave good (but still not
as good as SD) - it would be nice to try a later patch too.
basically, the current unfairness in the scheduler should be solved, one
way or another. Good testcases were posted and there's progress.
> (who the hell runs a 'make -j 200' or 50 while(1)'s in the real world?
not many - and i dont think Mike tested any of these - Mike tested
pretty low make -j values (Mike, can you confirm?).
(I personally routinely run 'make -j 200' build jobs on my box [because
it's the central server of a build cluster and high parallelism is
needed to overcome network latencies], but i'm pretty special in that
regard and i didnt use that workload as a test against any of these
schedulers.)
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
