Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751558AbWBMDD4 (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Feb 2006 22:03:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751556AbWBMDD4 (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Feb 2006 22:03:56 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.21]:22757 "HELO mail.gmx.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751098AbWBMDDz (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Feb 2006 22:03:55 -0500 X-Authenticated: #14349625 Subject: Re: 2.6 vs 2.4, ssh terminal slowdown From: MIke Galbraith To: Lee Revell Cc: Jan Engelhardt , Con Kolivas , gcoady@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar In-Reply-To: <1139787578.2739.13.camel@mindpipe> References: <200602081335.18256.kernel@kolivas.org> <1139515605.30058.94.camel@mindpipe> <1139553319.8850.79.camel@homer> <1139752033.27408.20.camel@homer> <1139771016.19342.253.camel@mindpipe> <1139780193.7837.7.camel@homer> <1139787578.2739.13.camel@mindpipe> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 04:09:29 +0100 Message-Id: <1139800169.7595.24.camel@homer> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1576 Lines: 36 On Sun, 2006-02-12 at 18:39 -0500, Lee Revell wrote: > On Sun, 2006-02-12 at 22:36 +0100, MIke Galbraith wrote: > > On Sun, 2006-02-12 at 14:03 -0500, Lee Revell wrote: > > > On Sun, 2006-02-12 at 14:47 +0100, MIke Galbraith wrote: > > > > If you think it's the scheduler, how about try the patch below. It's > > > > against 2.6.16-rc2-mm1, and should tell you if it is the interactivity > > > > logic in the scheduler or not. I don't see other candidates in there, > > > > not that that means there aren't any of course. > > > > > > I'll try, but it's a serious pain for me to build an -mm kernel. A > > > patch against 2.6.16-rc1 would be much easier. > > > > Ok, here she comes. It's a bit too reluctant to release a task so it > > can reach interactive status at the moment, but for this test, that's a > > feature. In fact, for this test, it's probably best to jump straight to > > setting both g1 and g2 to zero. > > Not only does this fix my "time ls" test case, it seems to drastically > improve interactivity for my desktop apps. I was really being plagued > by weird stalls, it's much smoother now. Yeah, but under load, that reluctance to release is fairly annoying... > > Now to regression test it... ...and may cause test applications to not reach their proper priority before measurement begins. -Mike - 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/