From owner-freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 7 14:15:54 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 975E6ED3 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 14:15:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.machdep.com (mail.machdep.com [195.91.211.41]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 517DC39D for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 14:15:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=machdep.com) by mail.machdep.com with smtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1WLvXK-000KeF-Ad for freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.org; Fri, 07 Mar 2014 18:14:06 +0400 Received: by machdep.com (nbSMTP-1.00) for uid 1001 br@machdep.com; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 18:14:06 +0400 (MSK) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2014 18:14:06 +0400 From: Ruslan Bukin To: freebsd-arm Subject: ULE on ARM Message-ID: <20140307141406.GA79223@machdep.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 14:15:54 -0000 I discovered just a couple of ARM kernel configs uses SCHED_ULE, but all other uses SCHED_4BSD any disadvantages to use ULE scheduler on ARM? or it is just because of historical reasons? I enabled ULE on Freescale Vybrid and running it for a long time just fine. according to my subjective impressions ULE works better on ARM in sound applications -Ruslan