Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S272401AbTGZJP1 (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jul 2003 05:15:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S272420AbTGZJP1 (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jul 2003 05:15:27 -0400 Received: from 153.Red-213-4-13.pooles.rima-tde.net ([213.4.13.153]:22025 "EHLO small.felipe-alfaro.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S272401AbTGZJP0 (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jul 2003 05:15:26 -0400 Subject: Ingo Molnar and Con Kolivas 2.6 scheduler patches From: Felipe Alfaro Solana To: LKML Cc: kernel@kolivas.org, mingo@elte.hu Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1059211833.576.13.camel@teapot.felipe-alfaro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.3.99 Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2003 11:30:33 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1972 Lines: 42 Hi, everyone, In first place, let me publicly thanks both of you (Info and Con) for your great work at fixing/tuning the 2.6 scheduler to its best. Now that Ingo seems to be working again on the scheduler, I feel that Con and Ingo work is starting to collide. I have been testing Con's interactivity changes to the scheduler for a very long time, since it's first O1int patch and I must say that, for my specific workloads, it gives me the best end-user experience with interactive usage. I just only wanted to publicly invite Con Kolivas to keep on working with the scheduler patches he has been doing and that have required a constant and fair amount of time from him. I don't know if Con patches do work as good for others in this list as for me, so I also invite everyone who is/has been testing them to express their feelings so we all can know what's the current status of the 2.6 scheduler. As the last point, I do want to invite Ingo and Con to work together to fix things up definitively. I feel Con scheduler patches give better interactive results (at least for me) but still feels a little bit slow when the system is under heavy load and I try to launch new processes, like a new xterm, for example. On the other side, Ingo patch makes the system feel much more responsive under heavy loads when launching new processes, like opening a new konsole tab, but still suffers from jerkyness on interactive tasks, like the X server. I think the more people working on the scheduler, the more probability we have of fixing/tuning the last pieces of code so we can enjoy a full enterprise-level, but well-behaved with interactive jobs, 2.6 scheduler. Thanks for listening. Felipe Alfaro Scheduler tester :-) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/