From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Mar 11 09:48:10 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from green.homeunix.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 64E2816A4CE; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 09:48:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from green.homeunix.org (green@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by green.homeunix.org (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i2BHm9Rt089776;
	Thu, 11 Mar 2004 12:48:09 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from green@green.homeunix.org)
Received: from localhost (green@localhost)i2BHm9qc089773;
	Thu, 11 Mar 2004 12:48:09 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from green@green.homeunix.org)
Message-Id: <200403111748.i2BHm9qc089773@green.homeunix.org>
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.6.3 04/04/2003 with nmh-1.0.4
To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: Message from Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> 
	<20040311044229.GA11614@xor.obsecurity.org> 
From: "Brian F. Feldman" <green@freebsd.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 12:48:08 -0500
Sender: green@green.homeunix.org
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: I like SCHED_4BSD 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 17:48:10 -0000

Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 09:36:45PM -0600, Conrad Sabatier wrote:
> > I just decided to revert to SCHED_4BSD for the time being.  Why?
> > 
> > o Better interactivity -- No mouse jerkiness, no sluggish screen updates when
> >   switching between virtual desktops, etc.
> > 
> > o Better scheduling!  I'm serious here.  Watching top under SCHED_ULE, I'm
> >   seeing 10, 15, 20 seconds go by where ALL processes are sleeping. 
> >   Processes seem to be spending inordinate amounts of time in the "kserel"
> >   state.  This, of course, doesn't happen with SCHED_4BSD.
> 
> That this observation may well be bogus, because you're trying to
> measure the scheduler using a tool that is itself run by the
> scheduler, so the process stats you see may not be representative of
> what is really happening on your system.

I don't think it's bogus.  SCHED_ULE on my system effectively locks up the 
init/rc process and causes total deadlock if I hit ^T.  It happens for 
Alfred, too.  SCHED_4BSD works, though.

-- 
Brian Fundakowski Feldman                           \'[ FreeBSD ]''''''''''\
  <> green@FreeBSD.org                               \  The Power to Serve! \
 Opinions expressed are my own.                       \,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\