lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: Linus 2.6.23-rc1
Date
Hi,

I never tried Con's patchset, for two reasons:
I tried his 2.4 patches ones, and I never saw any improvements. So when people
were reporting huge improvements with his SD scheduler, I compared that with
the reports of huge improvements with his 2.4 kernel patches.
...
The second: too many patches. I only would have tried one or two, but the
ck-patchset is a lot bigger.. and I am a little bit uneasy about that.

But I tried a lot of Ingo's cfs patches - and it was a very pleasant
experience. Ingo reacted very fast on my feedback and when I hit a problem he
really tried to find the cause and solve it - and it always was one patch, so
I felt a lot less scared ;)

My usual workload is very 'usual'. KDE desktop, kmail, konqueror, sometimes
xine or amarok providing some background noise while typing away in kate,
triplea, wesnoth or some other game when I need to 'rest' for a while. A lot
of compiling in the background, because I am one of these gentoo users.

With cfs the experience was much more pleasant than with the 'old' scheduler.
Compiling did not hurt as much as usual anymore - the only thing that hurts
is swap....

But there is another thing I do regularly: I play ut2004. Not every single
day, but sometimes several times a day. 20minutes of mayhem and then back to
the desktop.

And I do not see any problems with cfs and ut2004. The maximum FPS are indeed
a little bit lower (and you can argue that this really is not important if
the pre-game FPS in a level looking down on the floor go down from 390 to
380FPS), but the minimum FPS went up!

In scenes when my system is fighting hard to provide the FPS, when the action
is high (like when fighting with half a douzend bots at a power node, while
some other bots are shooting into the mess) CFS is much better than the old
scheduler. It is a big difference if you get 6-10FPS or 15-25.
(I am playing with maximum 'beautifullness' - I would be able to get a lot
more FPS, if I wanted, but I want a nice scenery and maximum visual
effects ...)

From my point of view 3D is a lot better with cfs.

Now the question for all the people who are bashing cfs for its bad 3d
performance: what am I doing wrong?

Glück Auf,
Volker

-
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: 2007-07-29 01:43    [W:0.060 / U:4.540 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site