My first impression of SCHED_ULE is "slow." I only say this because the first thing I
fire up after starting X is Eterm with a transparant+shaded theme. Even with the old
scheduler this Eterm wasn't too snappy, but with SCHED_ULE it hangs X for about 1-2
seconds. I'm currently running a kernel compile and everything still isn't as fluid as
before and the mouse is quite jumpy. Still, seems better then what I experienced a
week ago.
I'll be happy to keep compiling when you check in updates. I buildworld/kernel almost
every day.
James.
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003 01:25:24 -0500 (EST)
Jeff Roberson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm using SCHED_ULE on my laptop now. My recent round of fixes seems to
> have helped out. I'm getting good interactive performance. I'm doing the
> following:
>
> nice -5'd for (;;) {} process.
> make -j4 buildworld
>
> Mozilla, pine, irc, screen, vi, etc.
>
> All interactive tasks are very responsive. My nice -5'd looping process
> is getting 70% of the cpu and my compile is taking the rest. nice +20 may
> not behave as well as in sched_4bsd right now. I'm going to work on that.
>
> This is on a 2ghz laptop though so your mileage may vary. Use reports are
> welcome.
>
> Interactivity suffered so much over the last few weeks because I changed
> the mechanism that determines interactivity and that impacts slice
> assignment and priorities. It took me a while to get it right but it
> solved a major drawback with the old scheme. I do not anticipate any
> major rework on this part of the scheduler now. It should only be tuning.
>
> One thing that I'm looking for feedback on specifically is expensive but
> interactive applications. I'm thinking of office programs or mozilla on a
> slow machine. Do this while running a compile or a compute bound task.
>
> Thanks,
> Jeff
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
