Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Con Kolivas posted new kernel patches
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

 
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Unsupported Software
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Shining Arcanine
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 24 Sep 2009
Posts: 1110

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:22 am    Post subject: Con Kolivas posted new kernel patches Reply with quote

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=ODAxOQ

Has anyone tried these patches on Gentoo and can state whether or not they produce favorable results?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
albright
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 16 Nov 2003
Posts: 2542
Location: Near Toronto

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

the zen kernel uses at least some of his patches (BFS for sure);
there's a thread nearby about it
_________________
.... there is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth
doing as simply messing about with Linux ...
(apologies to Kenneth Graeme)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mikegpitt
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 22 May 2004
Posts: 3221

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The ck-sources used to be in the tree years ago, but I guess the patches went away for a while and left the tree.

There seems to be a bug open here to add the ebuild again:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=297169
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
loftwyr
l33t
l33t


Joined: 29 Dec 2004
Posts: 970
Location: 43°38'23.62"N 79°27'8.60"W

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 3:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm using them now and have been using the BFS for a while now.

Don't set the frequency too high as it makes everything unstable but the rest of the patches have (it seems to me) a benefit in responsiveness.
_________________
My emerge --info
Have you run revdep-rebuild lately? It's in gentoolkit and it's worth a shot if things don't work well.
Celebrating 5 years of Gentoo-ing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5673
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mikegpitt wrote:
The ck-sources used to be in the tree years ago, but I guess the patches went away for a while and left the tree.

There seems to be a bug open here to add the ebuild again:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=297169


I have updated the ebuilds in that bug for 2.6.32 and 2.6.33 and both work.
time to check if the patches work :D ( I have hte ck options, 10kHz tick is tempting just for lulz)
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king


Last edited by Naib on Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:03 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5673
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ok this is nice, very nice :D
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gqman69
n00b
n00b


Joined: 11 Jul 2007
Posts: 50

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 5:19 pm    Post subject: BFS and CONFIG_HZ Reply with quote

I have a Core i7 920, so there's Hyperthreading (4 cores, 2 threads/core).
If I use BFS and CONFIG_HZ=1000 there seem to be a huge responsiveness problem when
the system is under load. everything become jerky and the IO gets really slow.

If I use 300 or even less then everything runs very smooth. This doesn't happen with the usual scheduler.

However, I do not recommend using 1000 for multicore processors. There is some hiccups doing so, especially under load.
But nothing like BFS.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shining Arcanine
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 24 Sep 2009
Posts: 1110

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 6:32 pm    Post subject: Re: BFS and CONFIG_HZ Reply with quote

gqman69 wrote:
I have a Core i7 920, so there's Hyperthreading (4 cores, 2 threads/core).
If I use BFS and CONFIG_HZ=1000 there seem to be a huge responsiveness problem when
the system is under load. everything become jerky and the IO gets really slow.

If I use 300 or even less then everything runs very smooth. This doesn't happen with the usual scheduler.

However, I do not recommend using 1000 for multicore processors. There is some hiccups doing so, especially under load.
But nothing like BFS.


At 8 virtual cores, you are starting to approach the area where the default scheduler is better. I have CONFIG_HZ=1000 with vanilla-sources 2.6.33 on a Core Duo T2400 and I have no hiccups.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bollucks
l33t
l33t


Joined: 27 Oct 2004
Posts: 606

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 10:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Actually the -ck patch was already out with 2.6.32.

http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126059627831860&w=2

Somehow people seemed to miss it entirely? Anyway all of the -ck patches have been in -zen since they've been available, not just BFS.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5673
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 11:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bollucks wrote:
Actually the -ck patch was already out with 2.6.32.

http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126059627831860&w=2

Somehow people seemed to miss it entirely? Anyway all of the -ck patches have been in -zen since they've been available, not just BFS.

some of us don't want to use zensources
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kernelOfTruth
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 20 Dec 2005
Posts: 6108
Location: Vienna, Austria; Germany; hello world :)

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 11:07 pm    Post subject: Re: BFS and CONFIG_HZ Reply with quote

gqman69 wrote:
I have a Core i7 920, so there's Hyperthreading (4 cores, 2 threads/core).
If I use BFS and CONFIG_HZ=1000 there seem to be a huge responsiveness problem when
the system is under load. everything become jerky and the IO gets really slow.

If I use 300 or even less then everything runs very smooth. This doesn't happen with the usual scheduler.

However, I do not recommend using 1000 for multicore processors. There is some hiccups doing so, especially under load.
But nothing like BFS.


try tweaking the rr_interval whether that helps:

Code:
echo "3" > /proc/sys/kernel/rr_interval


or even

Code:
echo "1" > /proc/sys/kernel/rr_interval

_________________
https://github.com/kernelOfTruth/ZFS-for-SystemRescueCD/tree/ZFS-for-SysRescCD-4.9.0
https://github.com/kernelOfTruth/pulseaudio-equalizer-ladspa

Hardcore Gentoo Linux user since 2004 :D
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shining Arcanine
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 24 Sep 2009
Posts: 1110

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 11:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naib wrote:
bollucks wrote:
Actually the -ck patch was already out with 2.6.32.

http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126059627831860&w=2

Somehow people seemed to miss it entirely? Anyway all of the -ck patches have been in -zen since they've been available, not just BFS.

some of us don't want to use zensources


I tend to stay away from zen-sources. It introduces far too many changes about which I know nothing. I recently switched to vanilla-sources-2.6.33 for a similar reason, because gentoo-sources' changelog had patches that did not apply to my system. Having a separate ck-sources would be great.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cheater1034
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 09 Sep 2004
Posts: 1558

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 11:44 pm    Post subject: Re: BFS and CONFIG_HZ Reply with quote

kernelOfTruth wrote:
gqman69 wrote:
I have a Core i7 920, so there's Hyperthreading (4 cores, 2 threads/core).
If I use BFS and CONFIG_HZ=1000 there seem to be a huge responsiveness problem when
the system is under load. everything become jerky and the IO gets really slow.

If I use 300 or even less then everything runs very smooth. This doesn't happen with the usual scheduler.

However, I do not recommend using 1000 for multicore processors. There is some hiccups doing so, especially under load.
But nothing like BFS.


try tweaking the rr_interval whether that helps:

Code:
echo "3" > /proc/sys/kernel/rr_interval


or even

Code:
echo "1" > /proc/sys/kernel/rr_interval


I wouldn't think rr_interval has anything to do with it, and i still dont know about the setting of it to 1, but to each his own ;)
In the zen desktop profile rr_interval is 3, among other things changed - sched_iso_cpu is also changed to 25 for the desktop profile, particularly beneficial if you're using sched_iso for X

Shining Arcanine wrote:
Naib wrote:
bollucks wrote:
Actually the -ck patch was already out with 2.6.32.

http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126059627831860&w=2

Somehow people seemed to miss it entirely? Anyway all of the -ck patches have been in -zen since they've been available, not just BFS.

some of us don't want to use zensources


I tend to stay away from zen-sources. It introduces far too many changes about which I know nothing. I recently switched to vanilla-sources-2.6.33 for a similar reason, because gentoo-sources' changelog had patches that did not apply to my system. Having a separate ck-sources would be great.


It doesnt introduce many foreign changes, not anymore atleast.
Of course not everybody uses everything, but the ones that use what's added (ex: amd-k10, lirc, aufs, reiser4, dazuko, psx2usb, slqb, ureadahead, smapi, tuxonice, classic rcu, etc.) are really pleased - and the ones that don't aren't affected anyway.

Some stuff is internal too, like zen-notes, daconfig, etc.

Then there's 2.6-ck with cfs fix, and then a bunch of tweaks are added now, and things like autoiso and cfs boost.

But it's not for everybody so I don't mind ;), but added and not used stuff doesnt cause problems, so i'm not sure why people merge only the branches they use manually - because it's pointless 8O - I also dont understand staying away from it because it merges stuff you don't use - look at all the stuff you don't use in the upstream kernel ;)
_________________
IRC!: #zen-sources on irc.rizon.net
zen-kernel.org
--
Lost in android development land.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bollucks
l33t
l33t


Joined: 27 Oct 2004
Posts: 606

PostPosted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 9:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naib wrote:
bollucks wrote:
Actually the -ck patch was already out with 2.6.32.

http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126059627831860&w=2

Somehow people seemed to miss it entirely? Anyway all of the -ck patches have been in -zen since they've been available, not just BFS.

some of us don't want to use zensources


Oh I wasn't suggesting you should use zen, just pointing out that the patches have been around for a while.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
j-kidd
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 20 Feb 2003
Posts: 213

PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Code:

-        250 Hz is a good compromise choice allowing server performance
-        while also showing good interactive responsiveness even
-        on SMP and NUMA systems. If you are going to be using NTSC video
-        or multimedia, selected 300Hz instead.
+        250 HZ is a lousy compromise choice allowing server interactivity
+        while also showing desktop throughput and no extra power saving on
+        laptops. No good for anything.
+
+        Recommend 100 or 1000 instead.

:lol: server interactivity + desktop throughput
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shining Arcanine
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 24 Sep 2009
Posts: 1110

PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 3:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

j-kidd wrote:
Code:

-        250 Hz is a good compromise choice allowing server performance
-        while also showing good interactive responsiveness even
-        on SMP and NUMA systems. If you are going to be using NTSC video
-        or multimedia, selected 300Hz instead.
+        250 HZ is a lousy compromise choice allowing server interactivity
+        while also showing desktop throughput and no extra power saving on
+        laptops. No good for anything.
+
+        Recommend 100 or 1000 instead.

:lol: server interactivity + desktop throughput


When it comes to software design, compromises usually mean that you get to experience the worst of both worlds.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gqman69
n00b
n00b


Joined: 11 Jul 2007
Posts: 50

PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 10:01 pm    Post subject: Re: BFS and CONFIG_HZ Reply with quote

Shining Arcanine wrote:
gqman69 wrote:
I have a Core i7 920, so there's Hyperthreading (4 cores, 2 threads/core).
If I use BFS and CONFIG_HZ=1000 there seem to be a huge responsiveness problem when
the system is under load. everything become jerky and the IO gets really slow.

If I use 300 or even less then everything runs very smooth. This doesn't happen with the usual scheduler.

However, I do not recommend using 1000 for multicore processors. There is some hiccups doing so, especially under load.
But nothing like BFS.


At 8 virtual cores, you are starting to approach the area where the default scheduler is better. I have CONFIG_HZ=1000 with vanilla-sources 2.6.33 on a Core Duo T2400 and I have no hiccups.


Oh I understand you have no "hiccups" because it all depends on what you do. If you try using KDE4 + Composite and compile something that takes 75-100% CPU on all cores you WILL have hiccups and NO it's not "Normal". Multitasking CAN be smooth if you are setup correctly. I have fixed that with CONFIG_HZ=300, now everything smooth all the time including when I my cores are at 100% with "stress -c 8 -i 2" and lets say openoffice is compiled in the background.

My disk access is good, the desktop response if fluid with no jerkiness.

I use Nvidia, EXT4, CFS, with irqbalance and __GL_YIELD=NOTHING.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Unsupported Software All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum