Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 2 Jan 2002 18:14:44 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 2 Jan 2002 18:14:36 -0500 Received: from paloma13.e0k.nbg-hannover.de ([62.181.130.13]:64721 "HELO paloma13.e0k.nbg-hannover.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Wed, 2 Jan 2002 18:14:23 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" From: Dieter =?iso-8859-15?q?N=FCtzel?= Organization: DN To: Alan Cox Subject: Re: Linux 2.4.17 vs 2.2.19 vs rml new VM Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 00:14:24 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2] Cc: Linux Kernel List , Robert Love , J Sloan MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <20020102231431Z287173-13997+212@vger.kernel.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday, 2. January 2002 20:50, Alan cox wrote: > > I find the low latency patch makes a noticeable > > difference in e.g. q3a and rtcw - OTOH I have > > not been able to discern any tangible difference > > from the stock kernel when using -preempt. > > The measurements I've seen put lowlatency ahead of pre-empt in quality > of results. Since low latency fixes some of the locked latencies it might > be interesting for someone with time to benchmark > > vanilla > low latency > pre-empt > both together Don't forget that you have to use preempt-kernel-rml + lock-break-rml to achieve the same (more) than the latency patch. Taken from Robert's page and running it for some weeks, now. [-] Lock breaking for the Preemptible Kernel lock-break-rml-2.4.15-1 lock-break-rml-2.4.16-3 lock-break-rml-2.4.17-2 lock-break-rml-2.4.18-pre1-1 README ChangeLog With the preemptible kernel, the need for explicit scheduling points, like in the low-latency patches, are no more. However, since we can not preempt while locks are held, we can take a similar model as low-latency and "break" (drop and immediately reacquire) locks to improve system response. The trick is finding when and where we can safely break the locks (periods of quiescence) and how to safely recover. The majority of the lock breaking is in the VM and VFS code. This patch is for users with strong system response requirements affected by the worst-case latencies caused by long-held locks. [-] Regards, Dieter -- Dieter N?tzel Graduate Student, Computer Science University of Hamburg @home: Dieter.Nuetzel@hamburg.de - 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/