Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S272829AbTG3Ji3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2003 05:38:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S272838AbTG3Ji3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2003 05:38:29 -0400 Received: from c210-49-248-224.thoms1.vic.optusnet.com.au ([210.49.248.224]:20409 "EHLO mail.kolivas.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S272829AbTG3Ji2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2003 05:38:28 -0400 Message-ID: <1059557903.3f27920f97d4a@kolivas.org> Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 19:38:23 +1000 From: Con Kolivas To: Marc-Christian Petersen Cc: Felipe Alfaro Solana , linux kernel mailing list , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] O11int for interactivity References: <200307301038.49869.kernel@kolivas.org> <1059553792.548.2.camel@teapot.felipe-alfaro.com> <200307301040.38858.m.c.p@wolk-project.de> In-Reply-To: <200307301040.38858.m.c.p@wolk-project.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1425 Lines: 34 Quoting Marc-Christian Petersen : > On Wednesday 30 July 2003 10:29, Felipe Alfaro Solana wrote: > > Hi Felipe, > > > I'm running 2.6.0-test2-mm1 + O11int.patch + O11.1int.patch and I must > > say this is getting damn good! In the past, I've had to tweak scheduler > > knobs to tune the engine to my taste, but since O10, this is a thing of > > the past. It's working as smooth as silk... > > Good work! > I really really wonder why I don't experience this behaviour. For me, the > best > scheduler patch in the past was the one from you. I had a test last night > with 011.1 and I rebooted into 2.4 back after some hours of testing because > it is unusable for me under load, and it is no heavy load, it's just for > example a simple "make -j2 bzImage modules". > > What makes me even more wondering is that 2.6.0-test1-wli tree does not suck > > at all for interactivity where no scheduler changes were made. > > Maybe we need both: VM fixups (we need them anyway!) and O(1) fixups so that > also my machine will be happy ;) The obvious question still needs to be asked here. How does vanilla compare to vanilla +O11.1? Con - 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/