Re: [PATCH] O6.1int

From: Con Kolivas (
Date: Thu Jul 17 2003 - 03:21:41 EST

On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 18:04, Danek Duvall wrote:
> In 2.6.0-test1, the cc1 processes hover around 30 (early on they're

That's weird, unless you nice 5 them they shouldn't get any higher than 25. A
quick code review doesn't reveal to me why that would be the case.

> lower, but they ramp up quickly). Xmms stays fixed at 20 pretty much
> the entire time. X stays fixed at 15, though sometimes with heavy

Also weird; it's almost impossible to get stuck at the static priority. 20 is
what a nice 5 application would be.

> window moving it'll skyrocket to 16. :) Mozilla typically is at 20,

Also sounds like nice 5

> but after lots of scrolling, it edges up slowly (and, I think, pretty
> linearly) to 30. Scrolling's bad by the time you get to 23 (with the

Same thing.

> compile going; if it's the only interesting thing happening, it's smooth
> all the way up).
> The jerkiness in mozilla scrolling repeatedly takes three to four
> seconds before it shows up. Let it sit for a few more seconds and it's
> good to go again, at least for another three to four seconds.
> The python process updating the portage database is in the 23-25 range.
> In 2.6.0-test1-mm1 with O6.1int, mozilla takes longer to get jerky
> (15-20 seconds), but once it does, it gets stuck there pretty bad. Over
> the 16 minutes it took to compile the kernel, I think I managed to get
> it unstuck twice (maybe I didn't know how to do it right -- I kept
> poking at it and maybe that was the wrong thing to do). When left
> alone, it would settle at 24, though it would drop to 20 or 21 when
> either raised to the top of the window stack or lowered to the bottom
> (I'm using fvwm, in case that matters here). It would come back up to
> 24 within a second or two. Any scrolling instantly brought it up to 27
> and climbing.

Same. (how >25 ?)
> X, cc1, and xmms all had the same behavior as in vanilla (roughly the
> same amount of skippiness).
> The python process had a lower priority, spending most of its time in
> the 17-20 range.

That's more consistent.
> One other thing -- xmms skips seem to cause it to spit out
> ** WARNING **: snd_pcm_wait: Input/output error
> ** WARNING **: Buffer time reduced from 500 ms to 371 ms
> Not consistently one or the other or both, but at least one of those
> would show up each time.

Not sure what these really mean.

> Hope this helps,

Not entirely sure. I'll continue reviewing my code.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jul 23 2003 - 22:00:28 EST