[lkml]   [2003]   [Jun]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] 2.5.72 O(1) interactivity bugfix
    On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 03:59, Andreas Boman wrote:
    > On Wed, 2003-06-18 at 10:43, Con Kolivas wrote:
    > > Hash: SHA1
    > >
    > > Hi Ingo, all
    > >
    > > While messing with the interactivity code I found what appears to be an
    > > uninitialised variable (p->sleep_avg), which is responsible for all the
    > > boost/penalty in the scheduler. Initialising this variable to 0 seems to
    > > have made absolutely massive improvements to system responsiveness under
    > > load and completely removed audio skips up to doing a make -j64 on my
    > > uniprocessor P4 (beyond which swap starts being used), without changing
    > > the scheduler timeslices. This seems to help all 2.4 O(1) based kernels
    > > as well. Attached is a patch against 2.5.72 but I'm not sure about the
    > > best place to initialise it.
    > Applying this ontop of 2.5.72-mm1 causes more xmms/mpg321/ogg123
    > skipping than with plain -mm1 here. make -j20 on my up athlon 1900+ with
    > 512M ram causes extreme skipping until the make is killed. With plain
    > -mm1 I may get _one_ skip at the very begining of a song during make
    > -j20 (about 50% of the time). Plain -mm1 stops skipping after 10-15 sec
    > of playback of a song, and even switching desktops after that doesnt
    > cause skips, with or without make -j20 running (switching to/from
    > desktops with apps like mozilla, evolution etc. will cause skips during
    > the first 10-15 sec of a song regardless what I do it seems).
    > Renicing xmms to -15 doesnt change anything with either kernel.

    Hmm. I got too excited with the fact it improved so much on the 2.4 O(1)
    kernels that I didn't try it hard enough on the 2.5 kernels. I have had
    people quietly telling me that it isn't uninitialised, but that I am simply
    resetting it with this patch on new forked processes. It seems the extra
    changes to the 2.5 scheduler make this patch make things worse?

    I need more testing of the 2.4 one as well to see if it was just my
    combination of hardware and kernel that was better with this...


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:36    [W:0.022 / U:114.424 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site