On Sonntag 06 September 2009, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > On 09/06/2009 03:50 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > > On Sonntag 06 September 2009, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > >> On 09/06/2009 02:26 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > >>> On Sonntag 06 September 2009, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > >>>> On 09/06/2009 01:48 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > >>>>> On Samstag 05 September 2009, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > >>>>>> On 09/05/2009 05:59 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > >>>>>>>> 1000 Hz timer freq > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> change that to 300 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Did you mean tickless system with "noticks"? I have this enabled > >>>>>>>> ATM > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> deactivate that. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Even with that, there still are problems. With composite enabled, > >>>>>> move an mplayer window around and see how the video starts to skip > >>>>>> big amounts of frames at the moment you start moving and when you > >>>>>> "drop" it again. The compositor takes away CPU time and mplayer > >>>>>> starves for a short time. BFS solves this. > >>>>> > >>>>> nope. No drops. vlc, xine, mplayer. At least no visible drop - and > >>>>> none of the three is complaining. > >>>> > >>>> Well, not here. > >>>> > >>>>> But there is a pro-tip: use a non-broken X. aka one with > >>>>> > >>>>> fedora_dont_backfill_bg_none.patch > >>>> > >>>> I do use that. > >>>> > >>>>>> Also, have you considered that you got it all backwards? The kernel > >>>>>> configuration tells you that for lower latencies, you should use > >>>>>> 1000Hz and PREEMPT. It even says "Desktop" right there. Why should > >>>>>> I take your word over that of the kernel devs who actually wrote > >>>>>> that code? > >>>>> > >>>>> low latency means bad throughput and that hurts IO. > >>>> > >>>> GUI stalls still happen with high latency settings. Doesn't seem to > >>>> matter; 300Hz, 1000Hz, tickless or not, PREEMPT or not, multicore > >>>> scheduler or not, all the same. GUI stalls during load. It only goes > >>>> away with Con's scheduler. > >>> > >>> attached is my config. Because I don't need Con's scheduler for a nice > >>> desktop experience. > >> > >> Good for you. I'm attaching mine. > >> > >>> What am I doing wrong? > >> > >> I don't know. Maybe it's just that you're as perceptive as the average > >> turtle. > > > > and maybe you should decrapify your config a bit? Namespaces? Seccomp? > > Process accounting? no compat vdso? > > > > You really hate performance, do you? > > On another note: > > "Say N here if you are running a sufficiently recent glibc version > (2.3.3 or later), to remove the high-mapped VDSO mapping and to > exclusively use the randomized VDSO." > > And digging turned up that it saves about 6-10 instructions per syscall > but limits the flexibility. This may be a significant improvement for > intensive-IO processes. > > And about process accounting: > > "This is generally a good idea, so say Y."
yeah, if you are in a bean counter environment. Nobody else needs it. > > Well, I said Y. > > And on seccomp: > > "... If unsure, say Y. Only embedded should say N here." > > Well, guess what? I'm not on "embedded". and seccomp is only used by a single project by Andrea Arcangeli. Nobody else uses it. He also was the submitter of that feature.
