Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 04 Oct 2003 19:52:45 +1000 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: Problems caused by scheduler tweaks in 2.6.0-test6? |
| |
Con Kolivas wrote:
>On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 19:11, Nick Piggin wrote: > >>Did you see this Con? >> >>By the way Tom, I have my scheduler patch available for test6 here: >>http://www.kerneltrap.org/~npiggin/v15a/sched-rollup-v15a-260t6.gz >> >>Tom Sightler wrote: >> >>>Hi All, >>> >>>Over the last few months I have tested many different scheduler tweaks >>>mostly by testing the -mm kernels and also by applying Nick's patches >>>against vanilla kernels. Up until recently I have been very happy with >>>2.6.0-test5 with Nick's scheduler patches. >>> >>>Then I decided to try 2.6.0-test6 which seems to include a lot of Con's >>>work and, while overall this seems nice, I'm having two relatively >>>serious side effects that seem to be related to this inclusion. >>> >>>1. VMware performance varies wildly. I can't put my finger on this >>>exact issue, but I have found as way to repeatably trigger bad >>>performance. When running VMware in fullscreen mode, enable window >>>animation and repeatedly minimize/maximize a window. Under 2.4.x and >>>2.6.0-test5 w/Nick's patches this process runs reasonably smooth, >>>although noticably slower than native speed. With stock 2.6.0-test6 >>>after only a few seconds the minimize/maximize animiation slows to a >>>complete crawl, take 20+ seconds to complete the minimize opertaion. >>>I've tried tuning VMware with priorities but no luck. >>> >>>2. I also use Wine to run various Windows programs on occasion, >>>particularly Outlook 2000 (mainly when attempting to help other running >>>this application on Windows). The program runs fine, but always hangs >>>on exit. I didn't originally think this was related to the scheduler, >>>but interestingly, after applying Nick's patches to 2.6.0-test6, which >>>back out Con's changes, this problem goes away. >>> >>>Is there any help out there for these type of issues? I know that many >>>people seem to think these changes make life better, and I'll admidt >>>that playing MP3's and DVD's is better with these changes, but I'd >>>rather have my system preform well at other tasks. I would think having >>>a way to turn off all the fancy interactivity detection would be ideal >>>but there always seems to be opposition to adding tuning knobs. >>> >>> > >Please send a rundown of what top shows during these occurrences, and please >define "hangs". I can't see how the scheduler tweaks can bring the machine >down. >
Could be unrelated. Might be a livelock or priority inversion spinning thingy
- 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/
| |