Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S269239AbUIHRxl (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2004 13:53:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S269261AbUIHRxk (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2004 13:53:40 -0400 Received: from mail.tmr.com ([216.238.38.203]:3597 "EHLO gatekeeper.tmr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S269239AbUIHRxc (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2004 13:53:32 -0400 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Path: not-for-mail From: Bill Davidsen Newsgroups: mail.linux-kernel Subject: Re: Scheduler experiences (with Reiser4 bug report) Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2004 13:53:50 -0400 Organization: TMR Associates, Inc Message-ID: References: <20040905142502.GQ26192@nysv.org> <20040905155502.GR26192@nysv.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: gatekeeper.tmr.com 1094665602 30540 192.168.12.100 (8 Sep 2004 17:46:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@tmr.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040803 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en In-Reply-To: <20040905155502.GR26192@nysv.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1471 Lines: 30 Markus T?rnqvist wrote: > Yours truly wrote: > >>I haven't tried nicksched in a while, but it didn't perform as well as >>Staircase. > > > Just gave -rc1-mm3 a shot and had my filesystems say bad things. > shrike kernel: reiser4 panicked cowardly: assertion failed: extent_get_start(ext) == extent_get_start(&uf_coord->extension.extent.extent) > /bin/sh: line 1: 4407 Segmentation fault rm -f fs/xfs/.xfs_bmap.o.d > > > Didn't get around to renicing X, but anyway, app launch time was longer > and the music did twitch a bit when starting the simultaneous kernel > and glibc compiles. So I'm still on Staircase and don't see any reason > to change away. > > I retried running as much cpu-intensive stuff as I could on cko5, basically > ck6, and everything was smooth. Respects to Con for that :) > > This is not a troll nor a flamebait, but an honest question. > Should the need to re-nice X not be seen as broken behavior? It would be desirable to have things run without doing that, people will undoubtedly call it a bug or tuning, depending on point of view. -- -bill davidsen (davidsen@tmr.com) "The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the last possible moment - but no longer" -me - 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/