Re: Problems caused by scheduler tweaks in 2.6.0-test6?

[Con Kolivas]

On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 19:11, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Did you see this Con?
>
> By the way Tom, I have my scheduler patch available for test6 here:
> http://www.kerneltrap.org/~npiggin/v15a/sched-rollup-v15a-260t6.gz
>
> Tom Sightler wrote:
> >Hi All,
> >
> >Over the last few months I have tested many different scheduler tweaks
> >mostly by testing the -mm kernels and also by applying Nick's patches
> >against vanilla kernels.  Up until recently I have been very happy with
> >2.6.0-test5 with Nick's scheduler patches.
> >
> >Then I decided to try 2.6.0-test6 which seems to include a lot of Con's
> >work and, while overall this seems nice, I'm having two relatively
> >serious side effects that seem to be related to this inclusion.
> >
> >1.  VMware performance varies wildly.  I can't put my finger on this
> >exact issue, but I have found as way to repeatably trigger bad
> >performance.  When running VMware in fullscreen mode, enable window
> >animation and repeatedly minimize/maximize a window.  Under 2.4.x and
> >2.6.0-test5 w/Nick's patches this process runs reasonably smooth,
> >although noticably slower than native speed.  With stock 2.6.0-test6
> >after only a few seconds the minimize/maximize animiation slows to a
> >complete crawl, take 20+ seconds to complete the minimize opertaion.
> >I've tried tuning VMware with priorities but no luck.
> >
> >2.  I also use Wine to run various Windows programs on occasion,
> >particularly Outlook 2000 (mainly when attempting to help other running
> >this application on Windows).  The program runs fine, but always hangs
> >on exit.  I didn't originally think this was related to the scheduler,
> >but interestingly, after applying Nick's patches to 2.6.0-test6, which
> >back out Con's changes, this problem goes away.
> >
> >Is there any help out there for these type of issues?  I know that many
> >people seem to think these changes make life better, and I'll admidt
> >that playing MP3's and DVD's is better with these changes, but I'd
> >rather have my system preform well at other tasks.  I would think having
> >a way to turn off all the fancy interactivity detection would be ideal
> >but there always seems to be opposition to adding tuning knobs.
> >

Please send a rundown of what top shows during these occurrences, and please 
define "hangs". I can't see how the scheduler tweaks can bring the machine 
down.

Con

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/