Page 15 of 23 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 225

Thread: The ~200 Line Linux Kernel Patch That Does Wonders

  1. #141
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kernelOfTruth View Post
    BS

    did you even re-compile your kernel ?

    when enabling the autogroup option and cgroups for CFQ - which you're asked for the responsibility "feels" much better

    also: my apps seem to close and open noticably faster - it might be only 1-2 seconds less but it's noticable in my everyday workflow
    Placebo, unless you open all those apps from a terminal, AND have a task running that tries to eat up all your resources. Why do people think this patch is some kinda magical thing ?

    Which of the apps you're opening are attached to TTYs ?

    I recommend actually reading the thread discussing this patch before you go around calling my prev. post BS.

  2. #142
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    27

    Default

    Excellent points.

    Ultimately the kernel is there to accommodate different user-space cases, with sane defaults, options and all.

    The two sides of the whole (i.e us all) need to cooperate; and they do.

    Here (the optional) systemd represents users-space tools for adjusting system/kernel behaviour "on-the-fly" and with higher level of granularity.

    Still, the ability to configure kernel-space behaviour (at the time of compilation and without specific user-space tools) will be expected.

    All the eyeballs are there so... bring on 2011! (the year when Linux... servers take over the desktop!)


    Quote Originally Posted by marco View Post
    Update:
    After the fight Linus vs Lennart (kernel vs user) at the end Lennart implemented the same thing the patch does in systemd (check out latest commit).

    If the requisite is :
    The latency improves only by isolating tasks in containers (cgroups)
    In think Systemd acheives this in the right way:
    1. all is configurable (with pam-systemd you can choose whatever controller you like (cpu, memory, block by which every user isolate his tasks);
    2. systemd knows better what is a session (the kernel doesn't even know it);
    3. anytime, you can see what is going on (do a pstree on /sys/fs/cgroup)

  3. #143
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Richland, WA
    Posts
    134

    Default

    I don't know if anybody has seen this but its an alternative to the 200 line patch that does the same thing. Just add 4 lines to your bashrc and do two commands on the command line.

    http://www.webupd8.org/2010/11/alter...nel-patch.html

    benchmarks of both methods

    http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/11/16/392

  4. #144
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by misGnomer View Post
    Excellent points.

    Ultimately the kernel is there to accommodate different user-space cases, with sane defaults, options and all.

    The two sides of the whole (i.e us all) need to cooperate; and they do.

    Here (the optional) systemd represents users-space tools for adjusting system/kernel behaviour "on-the-fly" and with higher level of granularity.

    Still, the ability to configure kernel-space behaviour (at the time of compilation and without specific user-space tools) will be expected.

    All the eyeballs are there so... bring on 2011! (the year when Linux... servers take over the desktop!)
    This patch is really not supposed to be there! Lennart gave a 6 line script that does exactly the same and Linus said Mike developed the patch the same way.

    Linus' concern is that this behaviour is not default, but it should not be default if it is just a policy. I think that's the whole point those guys are arguing about. I do not think this patch is appropriate personally. Go with BFS. BFS rules.

  5. #145
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by glasen View Post
    Not necessarily. I've successfully applied the patch to a vanilla 2.6.36 kernel. The only thing i had to do was to correct two small errors.

    If someone is interested, here is the patch for kernel-version 2.6.36 :

    sched_automated_per_tty_task_groups_2.6.36.patch
    Thank you for the patch. It applied cleanly and I'm compiling now.

  6. #146
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Obscene_CNN View Post
    I don't know if anybody has seen this but its an alternative to the 200 line patch that does the same thing. Just add 4 lines to your bashrc and do two commands on the command line.

    http://www.webupd8.org/2010/11/alter...nel-patch.html

    benchmarks of both methods

    http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/11/16/392
    Exactly. I posted the same 2 pages back.

    When you translate a 6 line script to a 200 line kernel patch, it suddenly doesn't seem exciting anymore does it.

  7. #147
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Richland, WA
    Posts
    134

    Default

    Just a thought,

    Is there a way to use this patch to give an app that runs in a TTY priority over the GUI? In some cases people do have mission critical apps.

  8. #148
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marco View Post
    Update:
    After the fight Linus vs Lennart (kernel vs user) at the end Lennart implemented the same thing the patch does in systemd (check out latest commit).

    If the requisite is :
    The latency improves only by isolating tasks in containers (cgroups)
    In think Systemd acheives this in the right way:
    1. all is configurable (with pam-systemd you can choose whatever controller you like (cpu, memory, block by which every user isolate his tasks);
    2. systemd knows better what is a session (the kernel doesn't even know it);
    3. anytime, you can see what is going on (do a pstree on /sys/fs/cgroup);

    I would like to point out that this great work comes from the following history:
    • Con Kolivas sd scheduler;
    • Ingo Molnar cfs scheduler;
    • Ingo introduce Paul Menage cgroups in cfs scheduler;
    • Mike Galbraith in-kernel autogrouping based on cfs-cgroup scheduler;
    • Lennart Pottering autogrouping in user-space (systemd);


    This is a great story of success.
    Thanks to all people involved

    Marco
    Thanks for summarizing it Marco.

    I totally agree with the systemd solution and I am looking forward to testing it. Hopefully this will be availible in package updates for RHEL6(?).

    It would be interesting if we could set a approximate date on the history bullets?

  9. #149
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    26

    Default

    can someone backport this patch to the lucid kernel 2.6.32-22 ?

  10. #150
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    71

    Default

    This is a very stupid thread. You could do this with cgroups long ago (for cpu, disk and memory as well). All you need to do is to create wrappers for your favorite (or hated) programs to isolate their resource usage behavior. Read up on this:

    http://broadcast.oreilly.com/2009/06...-projects.html

    And yes, some people here are right. This is not going to magically speed up your program loads or make gcc compile your source faster (if at all, it will be a slow down in throughput: Ingo says its around 5% overhead).

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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