From owner-freebsd-current Thu Mar 6 23:41:17 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5F8F37B405 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 23:41:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from MX1.estpak.ee (ld3.estpak.ee [194.126.101.102]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BB5543FDD for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 23:41:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kalts@estpak.ee) Received: from kevad.internal (80-235-33-209-dsl.mus.estpak.ee [80.235.33.209]) by MX1.estpak.ee (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A629888A5; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 09:39:52 +0200 (EET) Received: (from vallo@localhost) by kevad.internal (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id h277f8e4001279; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 09:41:08 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from vallo) Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 09:41:07 +0200 From: Vallo Kallaste To: Jeff Roberson Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SCHED_ULE ok again. feedback please? Message-ID: <20030307074107.GA1230@kevad.internal> Reply-To: kalts@estpak.ee References: <20030304011700.C62398-100000@mail.chesapeake.net> <20030306204421.GA5095@kevad.internal> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030306204421.GA5095@kevad.internal> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i-ja.1 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 10:44:21PM +0200, Vallo Kallaste wrote: > > I'm using SCHED_ULE on my laptop now. My recent round of fixes seems to > > have helped out. I'm getting good interactive performance. I'm doing the > > following: > > > > nice -5'd for (;;) {} process. > > make -j4 buildworld > > > > Mozilla, pine, irc, screen, vi, etc. > > > > All interactive tasks are very responsive. My nice -5'd looping process > > is getting 70% of the cpu and my compile is taking the rest. nice +20 may > > not behave as well as in sched_4bsd right now. I'm going to work on that. > > > > This is on a 2ghz laptop though so your mileage may vary. Use reports are > > welcome. > > Much improved, can work while two seti@home processes run at nice > 19. Still takes more time to show directory listing (ls -la) compared > to scheduler and the listing itself is a bit "jumpy". Scrolls about > 20 lines, then waits for a moment, then scrolls forward again and so > on. The stopping moments are actually very short, but noticeable. > This is while the seti's are running, 2CPU PIII-500. Althought much better, KDE is still almost unusable, XFree and KDE startup takes a lot more time and starting plain xterm under KDE takes x3 time than usual. When I kill one of the seti processes, all comes down to normal. The one remaining seti process takes 53% of CPU constantly. Don't know how top calculates process CPU usage, but if the 100% is spread over the two processors, then the seti process monopolises one of the processors constantly. Doesn't matter will it run nice 19 or idprio 31. -- Vallo Kallaste To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message