Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 70

Thread: Kolivas Pushes New Kernel Responsiveness Patches

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,639

    Default Kolivas Pushes New Kernel Responsiveness Patches

    Phoronix: Kolivas Pushes New Kernel Responsiveness Patches

    Con Kolivas had stopped working on the Linux kernel for two years after he became fed up with the kernel development community, but last year he made a return by introducing the BFS scheduler. The BFS scheduler for the Linux kernel is quite simple in design compared to other schedulers, but it performed fairly well on desktop systems...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=ODAxOQ

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,675

    Default

    It does not seem to be that new as there are dirs for .32 too:

    http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kern...k/patches/2.6/

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,145

    Default

    I seriously question the value of what is produced by this guy. Seems to me that more often than not, his work is unusably buggy and makes things explode in MS like frequency. There may be fringe cases that could benefit from a *decent* implementation of some of his ideas, but it is definitely not of benefit for general users. Especially not in the forms he produces them.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    101

    Default

    I am particularly suspicious of the 10000Hz patch. A higher tick rate means more overhead. On the other hand, the overhead may still be tolerable on a fast system.

    Really, the thing that annoys me the most is system unresponsiveness in the face of high I/O. I can understand that reading a file can take a while if there is a lot of other disk I/O going on, but switching tabs on my browser should not be affected.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by waucka View Post
    Really, the thing that annoys me the most is system unresponsiveness in the face of high I/O. I can understand that reading a file can take a while if there is a lot of other disk I/O going on, but switching tabs on my browser should not be affected.
    I asked myself the same question.
    From my "investigation" the fault lies also with Firefox. When you "just" switch tabs actually Firefox also reads/writes some files and that's where the unresponsiveness comes from (my hdd has very poor iops).

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,801

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by karl View Post
    I asked myself the same question.
    From my "investigation" the fault lies also with Firefox. When you "just" switch tabs actually Firefox also reads/writes some files and that's where the unresponsiveness comes from (my hdd has very poor iops).
    Who's talking about Firefox? The problem is more general. 2.6.32 introduced changes in its scheduler (actually inspired by BFS) to make things better. But still, BFS gives better results.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealNC View Post
    Who's talking about Firefox? The problem is more general. 2.6.32 introduced changes in its scheduler (actually inspired by BFS) to make things better. But still, BFS gives better results.
    Maybe for you, because I don't notice any problems not related to slow 2D. I also notice my Linux system is more responsive then Windows - in example on my older hardware sound was stuttering in Windows under load. Last time I tried BFS it was in rather terrible state - dying input, very low performance in games when listening to the music same time (however, according to change log this problem is solved in the newest version). It seems BFS fits better on some configurations, but there are/were big problems with it.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealNC View Post
    Who's talking about Firefox? ...
    The parent poster was.
    (actually he didn't mentioned Firefox, he just said "browser" but I assume that he was referring to Firefox).

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by waucka View Post
    I am particularly suspicious of the 10000Hz patch. A higher tick rate means more overhead. On the other hand, the overhead may still be tolerable on a fast system.

    Really, the thing that annoys me the most is system unresponsiveness in the face of high I/O. I can understand that reading a file can take a while if there is a lot of other disk I/O going on, but switching tabs on my browser should not be affected.
    using 100kHz tick in a practical system is highly not recomended.
    This patch just provides more options with a max of 100kHz.
    Some old genetics patch in the love sources 5years back did a similar thing and the system becomes all but unusable above 10kHz (kernel spending more time switching context then letting processes do stuff...)

    I know I tried

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by waucka View Post
    Really, the thing that annoys me the most is system unresponsiveness in the face of high I/O. I can understand that reading a file can take a while if there is a lot of other disk I/O going on, but switching tabs on my browser should not be affected.
    You should try the latest kernel. I can't remember which kernel has it (2.6.32 or 2.6.33) but there's a change in there that should significantly improve IO read latencies under heavy write loads.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •