Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 02 Jan 2002 15:49:44 -0800 | From | J Sloan <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.4.17 vs 2.2.19 vs rml new VM |
| |
Well it is possible that with the several patches you mention that I might see results similar to what I now see with the low-latency patch.
However -
The preempt patch does NOT play well with the tux webserver, which I am using. So, preempt is not an option for me until and unless it is cleaned up to allow cooperation with tux.
tux and low-latency get along just fine.
cu
jjs
Dieter Nützel wrote:
>On Tuesday, 2. January 2002 20:50, Alan cox wrote: > >>>I find the low latency patch makes a noticeable >>>difference in e.g. q3a and rtcw - OTOH I have >>>not been able to discern any tangible difference >>>from the stock kernel when using -preempt. >>> >>The measurements I've seen put lowlatency ahead of pre-empt in quality >>of results. Since low latency fixes some of the locked latencies it might >>be interesting for someone with time to benchmark >> >> vanilla >> low latency >> pre-empt >> both together >> > >Don't forget that you have to use preempt-kernel-rml + lock-break-rml to >achieve the same (more) than the latency patch. > >Taken from Robert's page and running it for some weeks, now. > >[-] >Lock breaking for the Preemptible Kernel >lock-break-rml-2.4.15-1 >lock-break-rml-2.4.16-3 >lock-break-rml-2.4.17-2 >lock-break-rml-2.4.18-pre1-1 >README >ChangeLog >With the preemptible kernel, the need for explicit scheduling points, like in >the low-latency patches, are no more. However, since we can not preempt while >locks are held, we can take a similar model as low-latency and "break" (drop >and immediately reacquire) locks to improve system response. The trick is >finding when and where we can safely break the locks (periods of quiescence) >and how to safely recover. The majority of the lock breaking is in the VM and >VFS code. This patch is for users with strong system response requirements >affected by the worst-case latencies caused by long-held locks. >[-] > >Regards, > Dieter >
- 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/
| |