Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 07:37:11 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWF0ZXVzeiBKw6pkcmFzaWs=?= <imachine@toya.net.pl> To: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Xorg 6.8.1 and SCHED_ULE vs. SCHED_4BSD Message-ID: <4222BC17.5030406@toya.net.pl> In-Reply-To: <20050227213623.682e51d8.gstewart@bonivet.net> References: <20050226110651.0a20301b.gstewart@bonivet.net> <200502262225.24444.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <20050226130509.39e109e9.gstewart@bonivet.net> <200502262149.06501.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> <20050227213623.682e51d8.gstewart@bonivet.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Godwin Stewart napisał(a): > On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 21:49:00 +0100, Michael Nottebrock > <michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> wrote: > > >>>I've been using that for a long time now, since Xorg 6.8.1 breaks vt- >>>switching for me. > > One of the things I've been doing is to record some of my old cassettes > (you know, those old plastic things with 2 holes and a tape inside :) onto > CD. Applying a FFT filter to 50 minutes of audio takes between 10 and 15 > minutes on this machine (P-III/550, 384MB) depending on the complexity of > the filter. During this time, with SCHED_ULE and PREEMTION, the machine is > unusable. It freezes hard for periods of 10-12 seconds and then when it > unfreezes (while doing disk i/o apparently) the keys you typed turn up in > the wrong order. I currently run 5.4-PRE with ULE and PREEMPTION, on a similar machine (pIII-733 192RAM), also 6.8.1, and i do have to say that ULE has improved responsiveness /alongside kern.hz=800/ incredibly, with none-whatsoever speed degradation (actually my compilations seem to run faster, although that is only a mere hunch not yet backed up by any benchmarking). The only time i might encounter problems, is with the lack of ram, and a lot of disk swap usage, or during untarring of big distfiles (yet it is still giving me better response than with 4BSD, which was utterly terrible :) I honestly would have to say, great job on the ULE, if mere fixing of the possible disk i/o lock ups were to be commited its much better than 4BSD. > > However, now that I've reverted to SCHED_4BSD, the machine remains > perfectly snappy while performing the FFT filter, which doesn't happen > perceptibly slower. Perhaphs you can try with different kern.hz settings? -- Mateusz Jędrasik < imachine@toya.net.pl >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4222BC17.5030406>