On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 12:58:33AM -0700, vehemens wrote: > On Saturday 15 September 2007 11:19:32 pm Roman Bogorodskiy wrote: > >I'm curious if SCHED_ULE is designed to be used on a desktop system. I'm > >running -CURRENT at home and tried to use SCHED_ULE for some time. It > >works alright while the load is not very high. But once I start > >compiling something (running 'make buildworld' or 'portupgrade -a' for > >example), the machine comes almost unusable - X11's windows takes a lot > >of time to redraw, changing virtual desktop in window manager may take > >a several seconds. And it's nearly impossible to watch some movie with > >mplayer. > > I also see something similar running -CURRENT with SCHED_4BSD, > but it shows up with X/gnome. Remote logins are still responsive > and running X/twm works fine. In my experience, both 4BSD and ULE are unresponsive on the desktop in -CURRENT, with ULE being somewhat worse. Compiling an application causes the mouse to be jerky, windows to draw slowly, audio to start skipping, and occasionally the whole desktop freezes for a minute at a time (with ULE only). This is with INVARIANTS and all the debugging kernel options disabled and malloc debugging turned off. I'll give running without PREEMPTION with 4BSD and the ULE patch a shot, but in its stock form, -CURRENT is definitely worse than -STABLE on the desktop for me in a UP configuration. Up till now, I've been working around it manually by juggling with rtprio. If it's of any use, dmesg is at: http://redundancy.redundancy.org/dmesg.txtReceived on Sun Sep 16 2007 - 20:14:12 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:17 UTC