![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Robert Love wrote: > > ... > Not too sure what to make of it. It shows the interactivity estimator > does indeed help... but only if what you consider "important" is what is > considered "interactive" by the estimator. Andrew will say that is too > often not the case. > That is too often not the case. I can get the desktop machine working about as comfortably as 2.4.19 with: # echo 10 > max_timeslice # echo 0 > prio_bonus_ratio ie: disabling all the fancy new scheduler features :( Dropping max_timeslice fixes the enormous stalls which happen when an interactive process gets incorrectly identified as a cpu hog. (OK, that's expected) But when switching virtual desktops some windows still take a large fraction of a second to redraw themselves. Disabling the interactivity estimator fixes that up too. (Not OK. That's bad) hm. It's actually quite nice. I'd be prepared to throw away a few cycles for this. I don't expect the interactivity/cpuhog estimator will ever work properly on the desktop, frankly. There will always be failure cases when a sudden swing in load causes it to make the wrong decision. So it appears that to stem my stream of complaints we need to merge scheduler_tunables.patch and edit my /etc/rc.local. - 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/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:31 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||