Here is an updated version of the staircase scheduler. I've been trying to hold
off for 2.6.7 final but this has not been announced yet. Here is a brief update
summary.
http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/2.6/2.6.7-rc3/patch-2.6.7-rc3-s6.E
Changes:
A lot more code from the original scheduler not required by staircase has been
removed (610 deletions, 223 additions).
The "compute" mode now also includes cache trash minimisation by introducing
delayed preemption. A task of higher priority will force a reschedule after a
task has run a minimum of cache_decay_ticks. This increases the latency
slightly but optimises cpu cache utilisation.
The yield() implementation was fixed to ensure it yielded to all other tasks.
Tiny cleanups elsewhere.
Stability of this version has been confirmed in a number of different settings
for days.
Testing, comments welcome.
Con
On Wed, 2004-06-16 at 07:04 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> Here is an updated version of the staircase scheduler. I've been trying to hold
> off for 2.6.7 final but this has not been announced yet. Here is a brief update
> summary.
I'm currently testing this one. The problems I was having when trying to
suspend have gone away with this new release, so it looks promising to
me. Will keep you informed.
Thanks!
PS: I'm modifying your patch for 2.6.7-rc3-mm2. Could you please provide
newer versions of this patch against -mm kernels?
Felipe Alfaro Solana wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-06-16 at 07:04 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
>
>>Here is an updated version of the staircase scheduler. I've been trying to hold
>>off for 2.6.7 final but this has not been announced yet. Here is a brief update
>>summary.
>
>
> I'm currently testing this one. The problems I was having when trying to
> suspend have gone away with this new release, so it looks promising to
> me. Will keep you informed.
Great!
> Thanks!
Welcome
> PS: I'm modifying your patch for 2.6.7-rc3-mm2. Could you please provide
> newer versions of this patch against -mm kernels?
There already was a patch for 2.6.7-rc3-mm2 on my website... just look
up a directory :-\
Con
Con Kolivas wrote:
> Here is an updated version of the staircase scheduler. I've been trying to hold
> off for 2.6.7 final but this has not been announced yet. Here is a brief update
> summary.
Hi, does this resolve the issue with ut2004? (Or is another setting for
it needed?) I haven't tried myself, but others reported that setting
interactive to 0 didn't help, nor giving ut2004 more priority via (re)nice.
Thanx,
Prakash
Prakash K. Cheemplavam wrote:
> Con Kolivas wrote:
>
>> Here is an updated version of the staircase scheduler. I've been
>> trying to hold
>> off for 2.6.7 final but this has not been announced yet. Here is a
>> brief update
>> summary.
>
>
> Hi, does this resolve the issue with ut2004? (Or is another setting for
> it needed?) I haven't tried myself, but others reported that setting
> interactive to 0 didn't help, nor giving ut2004 more priority via (re)nice.
Good question. I don't own UT2004 so I was hoping a tester might
enlighten me.
Con
Con Kolivas wrote:
> Prakash K. Cheemplavam wrote:
>
>> Con Kolivas wrote:
>>
>>> Here is an updated version of the staircase scheduler. I've been
>>> trying to hold
>>> off for 2.6.7 final but this has not been announced yet. Here is a
>>> brief update
>>> summary.
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi, does this resolve the issue with ut2004? (Or is another setting
>> for it needed?) I haven't tried myself, but others reported that
>> setting interactive to 0 didn't help, nor giving ut2004 more priority
>> via (re)nice.
>
>
> Good question. I don't own UT2004 so I was hoping a tester might
> enlighten me.
Well you can download the Demo for free...
Prakash
Prakash K. Cheemplavam wrote:
> Con Kolivas wrote:
> >> Prakash K. Cheemplavam wrote:
>>>>> Con Kolivas wrote:
>>>>>>> Here is an updated version of the staircase scheduler. I've been
>>>> trying to hold
>>>> off for 2.6.7 final but this has not been announced yet. Here is a
>>>> brief update
>>>> summary.
>>> Hi, does this resolve the issue with ut2004? (Or is another setting
>>> for it needed?) I haven't tried myself, but others reported that
>>> setting interactive to 0 didn't help, nor giving ut2004 more priority
>>> via (re)nice.
>> Good question. I don't own UT2004 so I was hoping a tester might
>> enlighten me.
> Well you can download the Demo for free...
Not everyone has hardware (including graphic cards) that are capable of
running it.
Con
Con Kolivas wrote:
> Prakash K. Cheemplavam wrote:
>
>> Con Kolivas wrote:
>> >> Prakash K. Cheemplavam wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Con Kolivas wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here is an updated version of the staircase scheduler. I've been
>>>>>
>>>>> trying to hold
>>>>> off for 2.6.7 final but this has not been announced yet. Here is a
>>>>> brief update
>>>>> summary.
>>>>
>>>> Hi, does this resolve the issue with ut2004? (Or is another setting
>>>> for it needed?) I haven't tried myself, but others reported that
>>>> setting interactive to 0 didn't help, nor giving ut2004 more
>>>> priority via (re)nice.
>>>
>>> Good question. I don't own UT2004 so I was hoping a tester might
>>> enlighten me.
>>
>> Well you can download the Demo for free...
>
>
> Not everyone has hardware (including graphic cards) that are capable of
> running it.
Ok, yes, that's true. When I got time, I'll test your scheduler again
and ask you what I should try.
Prakash
Con,
I would like to try this against a 2.6.7 now that it
is out. I am assuming the 267-rc3 patch will not go
nicely against a 2,6.7, so is there any way to update
this patch set?
Thanks!
Phy
--- Con Kolivas <[email protected]> wrote:
> Here is an updated version of the staircase
> scheduler. I've been trying to hold
> off for 2.6.7 final but this has not been announced
> yet. Here is a brief update
> summary.
>
>
http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/2.6/2.6.7-rc3/patch-2.6.7-rc3-s6.E
>
>
> Changes:
>
> A lot more code from the original scheduler not
> required by staircase has been
> removed (610 deletions, 223 additions).
>
> The "compute" mode now also includes cache trash
> minimisation by introducing
> delayed preemption. A task of higher priority will
> force a reschedule after a
> task has run a minimum of cache_decay_ticks. This
> increases the latency
> slightly but optimises cpu cache utilisation.
>
> The yield() implementation was fixed to ensure it
> yielded to all other tasks.
>
> Tiny cleanups elsewhere.
>
>
> Stability of this version has been confirmed in a
> number of different settings
> for days.
>
> Testing, comments welcome.
> Con
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
> "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at
> http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Con Kolivas wrote:
> Prakash K. Cheemplavam wrote:
>
>> Con Kolivas wrote:
>> >> Prakash K. Cheemplavam wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Con Kolivas wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here is an updated version of the staircase scheduler. I've been
>>>>>
>>>>> trying to hold
>>>>> off for 2.6.7 final but this has not been announced yet. Here is a
>>>>> brief update
>>>>> summary.
>>>>
>>>> Hi, does this resolve the issue with ut2004? (Or is another setting
>>>> for it needed?) I haven't tried myself, but others reported that
>>>> setting interactive to 0 didn't help, nor giving ut2004 more
>>>> priority via (re)nice.
>>>
>>> Good question. I don't own UT2004 so I was hoping a tester might
>>> enlighten me.
SO, I tried out vanilla + ck1 and guess what: ut2004 runs without probs,
I haven't changed anything. COuld it be mm related? I think I will try
your latest patch with mm again and see how it goes.
Prakash
>> Hi, does this resolve the issue with ut2004? (Or is another setting
>> for it needed?) I haven't tried myself, but others reported that
>> setting interactive to 0 didn't help, nor giving ut2004 more priority
>> via (re)nice.
>
>Good question. I don't own UT2004 so I was hoping a tester might
>enlighten me.
>
>Con
Well, I can report that it looks just fine from here. I'm running 2.6.7
with the staircase patch, and UT2004 - as well as everything else -
works great. Machine is an Athlon XP 2600+ with nVidia FX 5600. I
haven't tweaked any nice values or /proc settings.
FWIW, the whole 2.6.7 experience seems great. All of the mysterious
troubles I had with 2.6.6 (eg failing to call init) seem to have
vanished, and everything is running beautifully again. For me, at
least, 2.6.6 was a very ungreased turkey, but now I'm happy again!
Cheers
Alastair
--
o
Alastair Stevens : child of 1976 /-'_ LPI (Level 1)
>> http://www.altruxsolutions.co.uk |\/(*) /\__ Linux Certified
_________________________________ . .(*) _____/ \___________________
Still browsing with IE? GET WITH THE PROGRAM @ http://www.mozilla.org/firefox
UT2004 works just fine here on a 2.6.7-rc3-mm2 with s6.E!
By the way great work Con!
P.S.
There is some problem with the patch for the mm2.
All hunks succeeded but somehow there was a compilation error in kernel/sched.c.
After commenting out the following line I was able to compile the kernel:
line 118:
/*prio_array_t *active, *expired, arrays[2];*/
Panagiotis Papadakos
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004, Con Kolivas wrote:
> Prakash K. Cheemplavam wrote:
> > Con Kolivas wrote:
> >
> >> Here is an updated version of the staircase scheduler. I've been
> >> trying to hold
> >> off for 2.6.7 final but this has not been announced yet. Here is a
> >> brief update
> >> summary.
> >
> >
> > Hi, does this resolve the issue with ut2004? (Or is another setting for
> > it needed?) I haven't tried myself, but others reported that setting
> > interactive to 0 didn't help, nor giving ut2004 more priority via (re)nice.
>
> Good question. I don't own UT2004 so I was hoping a tester might
> enlighten me.
>
> Con
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 09:54, Panagiotis Papadakos wrote:
> UT2004 works just fine here on a 2.6.7-rc3-mm2 with s6.E!
> By the way great work Con!
Great!
> P.S.
> There is some problem with the patch for the mm2.
> All hunks succeeded but somehow there was a compilation error in
> kernel/sched.c. After commenting out the following line I was able to
> compile the kernel: line 118:
> /*prio_array_t *active, *expired, arrays[2];*/
Sorry the -mm patches are contributed. I may move to doing them myself soon.
Con
On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 07:43, Prakash K. Cheemplavam wrote:
> Con Kolivas wrote:
> > Prakash K. Cheemplavam wrote:
> >> Con Kolivas wrote:
> >> >> Prakash K. Cheemplavam wrote:
> >>>>>> Con Kolivas wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Here is an updated version of the staircase scheduler. I've been
> >>>>>
> >>>>> trying to hold
> >>>>> off for 2.6.7 final but this has not been announced yet. Here is a
> >>>>> brief update
> >>>>> summary.
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi, does this resolve the issue with ut2004? (Or is another setting
> >>>> for it needed?) I haven't tried myself, but others reported that
> >>>> setting interactive to 0 didn't help, nor giving ut2004 more
> >>>> priority via (re)nice.
> >>>
> >>> Good question. I don't own UT2004 so I was hoping a tester might
> >>> enlighten me.
>
> SO, I tried out vanilla + ck1 and guess what: ut2004 runs without probs,
> I haven't changed anything. COuld it be mm related? I think I will try
> your latest patch with mm again and see how it goes.
Great! Any sort of acpi or sound driver update could be responsible, but I'm
glad to hear it's working for you.
Thanks for feedback.
COn