The v2 Rotary Interactivity Favor Scheduler

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kernelOfTruth

looks good to me :)


compiling libreoffice right now

probably will add some more spice to it to see how it works out :D


thanks ! great job :cool:

---

Thanks for comments. :cool:
I want someone to try RIFS-ES V1 also. If you have time could you help me to try? Thanks.
If it works better than RIFS-V2-Bugfix2 then RIFS-ES will be combined to RIFS. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 3766691

Thanks for comments. :cool:
I want someone to try RIFS-ES V1 also. If you have time could you help me to try? Thanks.
If it works better than RIFS-V2-Bugfix2 then RIFS-ES will be combined to RIFS. :)

---

Quote:

---

LD arch/x86/built-in.o
CC kernel/sched/rifs.o
kernel/sched/rifs.c: In function ‘sched_fork’:
kernel/sched/rifs.c:1460:3: error: ‘struct task_struct’ has no member named ‘tick_used’
kernel/sched/rifs.c:1460:21: error: ‘struct task_struct’ has no member named ‘tick_used’
kernel/sched/rifs.c: In function ‘wake_up_new_task’:
kernel/sched/rifs.c:1518:3: error: ‘struct task_struct’ has no member named ‘tick_used’
kernel/sched/rifs.c: In function ‘task_running_tick’:
kernel/sched/rifs.c:2389:6: error: ‘struct task_struct’ has no member named ‘tick_used’
kernel/sched/rifs.c:2390:4: error: ‘struct task_struct’ has no member named ‘tick_used’
kernel/sched/rifs.c: In function ‘check_timeslice_end’:
kernel/sched/rifs.c:2509:9: error: ‘struct task_struct’ has no member named ‘sleep_cnt’
kernel/sched/rifs.c:2510:7: error: ‘struct task_struct’ has no member named ‘sleep_cnt’
kernel/sched/rifs.c:2511:8: error: ‘struct task_struct’ has no member named ‘tick_used’
kernel/sched/rifs.c:2511:8: error: ‘struct task_struct’ has no member named ‘sleep_cnt’
kernel/sched/rifs.c:2513:24: error: ‘struct task_struct’ has no member named ‘sleep_jiffy’
kernel/sched/rifs.c:2514:7: error: ‘struct task_struct’ has no member named ‘sleep_cnt’
kernel/sched/rifs.c:2515:6: error: ‘struct task_struct’ has no member named ‘sleep_jiffy’
kernel/sched/rifs.c:2521:37: error: ‘struct task_struct’ has no member named ‘tick_used’
kernel/sched/rifs.c:2522:4: error: ‘struct task_struct’ has no member named ‘tick_used’
make[2]: *** [kernel/sched/rifs.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [kernel/sched] Error 2
make: *** [kernel] Error 2

---

the patch is monolithic right ?

thanks !


edit:

ok, seemed that the build went wacko - I forgot to make clean mrproper before

d'oh !

2nd compile went fine

my bad


will try now :)


edit2:

ok doesn't built - same error

seems genkernel has something against it


someone else has to try it ;)


thanks !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kernelOfTruth

the patch is monolithic right ?

thanks !


edit:

ok, seemed that the build went wacko - I forgot to make clean mrproper before

d'oh !

2nd compile went fine

my bad


will try now :)


edit2:

ok doesn't built - same error

seems genkernel has something against it


someone else has to try it ;)


thanks !

---

Edit 1:
Sorry for my fault.
The header file sched.h in the patch is not synchronous to my version that I am using.
I will fix it after a few hours.


Edit 2:
Ok, I have posted the new one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 3766691

Edit 1:
Sorry for my fault.
The header file sched.h in the patch is not synchronous to my version that I am using.
I will fix it after a few hours.


Edit 2:
Ok, I have posted the new one.

---

thanks !

I'll probably try it tomorrow or within the next days - currently my box is busy working ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kernelOfTruth

looks good to me :)


compiling libreoffice right now

probably will add some more spice to it to see how it works out :D


thanks ! great job :cool:

---

results:

ok, I put the rifs for 3.4 to some test (the one without ES / enhanced scheduling)

compiling libreoffice + rsyncing data on encrypted partitions (1 TB) to zlib-compressed btrfs + 1080p HD flash/youtube video

everything super-smooth and interactive

== keeper


best recent kernel so far


I combined it with The Barbershop Load Distribution algorithm IMO a winning combination :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kernelOfTruth

thanks !

I'll probably try it tomorrow or within the next days - currently my box is busy working ...





results:

ok, I put the rifs for 3.4 to some test (the one without ES / enhanced scheduling)

compiling libreoffice + rsyncing data on encrypted partitions (1 TB) to zlib-compressed btrfs + 1080p HD flash/youtube video

everything super-smooth and interactive

== keeper


best recent kernel so far


I combined it with The Barbershop Load Distribution algorithm IMO a winning combination :D

---

BLD is much simple and perform better than Vanilla load balancing.But now BLD can just work with mainline.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 3766691

BLD is much simple and perform better than Vanilla load balancing.But now BLD can just work with mainline.

---

yeah, these are way too oversized/overheaded for desktop or small system's usage


currently trying out RIFS-ES

thanks Chen !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kernelOfTruth

yeah, these are way too oversized/overheaded for desktop or small system's usage


currently trying out RIFS-ES

thanks Chen !

---

Hi KOT.
Here is the benchmark about latency :cool:
https://rifs-scheduler.googlecode.com/files/Result.PNG

Chen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 3766691

Hi KOT.
Here is the benchmark about latency :cool:
https://rifs-scheduler.googlecode.com/files/Result.PNG

Chen

---

thanks !

yeah, what I experienced so far

RIFS vs. RIFS-ES isn't much difference noticable under "normal" productivity load

but under pretty heavy load it probably is noticable :D


BFS was already quite good but had some issues since I upgraded my hardware from Core 2 Duo to Core i7 Quad (+ HT) at least it wasn't the same


CFS improves with newer kernel releases and it quite nice with autogroup but obviously needs improvements (little sound/video stuttering from time to time during heavy i/o, etc.)


RIFS / RIFS-ES is best so far - very very good for desktop usage


Chen, could you also make a port for 2.6.35, 2.6.39 and 3.0/3.1 kernels ?


I believe the XDA devs might love it (I'm an XDA dev myself) and it would definitely improve smoothness and responsiveness with less overhead on the phones :cool:

besides that RIFS would get more testing, fame and geek status ;)


thanks for considering :)

CC kernel/power/suspend.o
* CC kernel/power/poweroff.o
* LD kernel/power/built-in.o
* CC kernel/sched/rifs.o
* CC arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.o
*kernel/sched/rifs.c:343:19: fatal error: stats.h: No such file or directory
*compilation terminated.

By the way, this gets an empty git:
git clone https://code.google.com/p/rifs-scheduler

Regarding my stat.h error:
I am using gcc-4.6. Are you using an older compiler version?