Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 14 Jan 2002 17:31:03 -0800 | From | J Sloan <> | Subject | Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable |
| |
Daniel Phillips wrote:
>On January 13, 2002 08:35 pm, J Sloan wrote: > >>The problem here is that when people report >>that the low latency patch works better for them >>than the preempt patch, they aren't talking about >>bebnchmarking the time to compile a kernel, they >>are talking about interactive feel and smoothness. >> > >Nobody is claiming the low latency patch works better than >-preempt+lock_break, only that low latency can equal -preempt+lock_break, >which is a claim I'm skeptical of, but oh well. > AFAICT Alan Cox et al are saying that low-latency gives better latency than -preempt, but that if lock-break is added to -preempt, the results are basically the same.
IOW lock-break + preempt =~ low-latency as far as the latency question is concerned.
>>I've no agenda other than wanting to see linux >>as an attractive option for the multimedia and >>gaming crowds - and in my experience, the low >>latency patches simply give a much smoother >>feel and a more pleasant experience. Kernel >>compilation time is the farthest thing from my >>mind when e.g. playing Q3A! >> > >You need to read the thread *way* more closely ;-) > Admittedly my observations have been more from an "end-user" point of view, because at the end of the day, what I experience while using Linux as a multimedia/gaming platform is worth more than a barrel of benchmarks - and while kernel compilation time is of interest, it is just _one_ benchmark in the greater scheme of things. (not to mention that that benchmark result could probably be matched in a non -preempt kernel via /proc tuning)
>>I'd be happy to check out the preempt patch >>again and see if anything's changed, if the >>problem of tux+preempt oopsing has been >>dealt with - >> > >Right, useful. > See my previous reply, or the archives -
Regards,
jjs
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |