Date:	Sun, 22 Apr 2007 18:59:55 -0700
From:	hechacker1 <hechacker1@...il.com>
To:	unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input)
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Fwd: [ck] [ANNOUNCE] Staircase Deadline cpu scheduler version 0.46

From: hechacker1 <hechacker1@...il.com>
Date: Apr 22, 2007 6:09 PM
Subject: Re: [ck] [ANNOUNCE] Staircase Deadline cpu scheduler version 0.46
To: Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>

First of all, thank you for your continued development of SD. I've
been using RSDL v.30 since it came out with skunk-sources (a gentoo
patchset). It has ran stable since that time.

I went ahead and taught myself how to patch a kernel together so I
could try  SD-0.46.

hechacker1@...m ~ $ uname -a
Linux 700m 2.6.21-rc7-sd046-rsdl #2 PREEMPT Sun Apr 22 15:13:36 PDT
2007 i686 Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.70GHz GenuineIntel
GNU/Linux

My findings:
SD 0.46 is much more responsive than RSDL  0.30. I have portage niced
to 19, make -j2, and it doesn't interfere with Xorg/Beryl at all.
Animations are silky smooth in beryl compared to the standard 2.6.21
scheduler which lags/becomes jerky when there is any kind of load (and
nicing it didn't help). This is especially important since I use
resier4 with cryptcompress (lzo) and it does peg out my CPU at 100%
during portage database rebuilds and searches. Not to mention all the
untaring/unzipping that portage does to build from source (and i have
everything built in tmpfs, so there isn't an i/o limitation).

I have rr_interval at 6 ms.

Xorg is "slightly" more responsive (doesn't lag) under load with nice
-10, although I also have beryl and emerald to worry about too since
they draw the windows and consume cpu. Xorg with nice 0 is still
responsive under all loads, so at least the tweak isn't required.

So far this is my new favorite scheduler. I'm compiling openoffice in
the background right now and I can't even notice it.

I will spend some time with this scheduler to get a feel for its
performance and later try CFS to get a comparison.



On 4/22/07, Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org > wrote:
>  Yet another significant bugfix for SMP balancing was just posted for the
> staircase deadline cpu scheduler which improves behaviour dramatically on any
> SMP machine.
>
> Thanks to Willy Tarreau for noticing more bugs.
>
> As requested was a version in the Makefile so this version of the patch
> adds -sd046 to the kernel version.
>
>  http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/staircase-deadline/2.6.21-rc7-sd-0.46.patch
> http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/staircase-deadline/2.6.20.7-sd-0.46.patch
>
> Renicing X to -10, while not essential, may be desirable on the desktop.
> Unlike the CFS scheduler which renices X without your intervention to
> nice -19, the SD patches do not alter nice level on their own.
>
> See the patch just posted called 'sched: implement staircase deadline
>  scheduler load  weight fix' for details of the fixes.
>
> Thanks to all testing and giving feedback.
>
> Well I'm exhausted...
>
> --
> -ck
> _______________________________________________
>   http://ck.kolivas.org/faqs/replying-to-mailing-list.txt
> ck mailing list - mailto: ck@....kolivas.org
>  http://vds.kolivas.org/mailman/listinfo/ck
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists