Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261496AbVEYRRo (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 May 2005 13:17:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261497AbVEYRRo (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 May 2005 13:17:44 -0400 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:30091 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261496AbVEYRRh (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 May 2005 13:17:37 -0400 To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Sven Dietrich , dwalker@mvista.com, bhuey@lnxw.com, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, hch@infradead.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: RT patch acceptance References: <1116957953.31174.37.camel@dhcp153.mvista.com> <20050524224157.GA17781@nietzsche.lynx.com> <1116978244.19926.41.camel@dhcp153.mvista.com> <20050525001019.GA18048@nietzsche.lynx.com> <1116981913.19926.58.camel@dhcp153.mvista.com> <20050525005942.GA24893@nietzsche.lynx.com> <1116982977.19926.63.camel@dhcp153.mvista.com> <20050524184351.47d1a147.akpm@osdl.org> <4293DCB1.8030904@mvista.com> <20050524192029.2ef75b89.akpm@osdl.org> <20050525063306.GC5164@elte.hu> From: Andi Kleen Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 19:17:36 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20050525063306.GC5164@elte.hu> (Ingo Molnar's message of "Wed, 25 May 2005 08:33:06 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1558 Lines: 41 Ingo Molnar writes: > * Andrew Morton wrote: > >> Sven Dietrich wrote: >> > >> > I think people would find their system responsiveness / tunability >> > goes up tremendously, if you drop just a few unimportant IRQs into >> > threads. >> >> People cannot detect the difference between 1000usec and 50usec >> latencies, so they aren't going to notice any changes in >> responsiveness at all. > > i agree in theory, but interestingly, people who use the -RT branch do > report a smoother desktop experience. While it might also be a I bet if you did a double blind test (users not knowing if they run with RT patch or not or think they are running with patch when they are not) they would report the same. Basically when people go through all that effort of applying a patch then they really want to see an improvement. If it is there or not. You surely have seen that with other patches when users suddenly reported something worked better/smoother with a new release etc and there was absolutely no explanation for it in the changed code. I have no reason to believe this is any different with all this RT testing. -Andi (who also would prefer to not have interrupt threads, locks like a maze and related horribilities in the mainline kernel) - 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/