Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 08:39:15 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu@people.tecnik93.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ULE status Message-ID: <20050208163915.GC43054@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20050208155822.29df9373@it.buh.tecnik93.com> References: <Pine.BSO.4.56.0502081306440.28295@ux11.ltcm.net> <200502081333.08964.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> <4253.213.222.48.10.1107866717.squirrel@mailgw.icon.bg> <20050208155822.29df9373@it.buh.tecnik93.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--S1BNGpv0yoYahz37 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 03:58:22PM +0200, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 14:45:17 +0200 (EET) > "Viktor Ivanov" <v0rbiz@icon.bg> wrote: >=20 > > On Tue, ???????? 8, 2005 14:33, Michael Nottebrock ????: > > > On Tuesday, 8. February 2005 13:07, Mipam wrote: > > >> I saw several changes to sched_ule.c in the 5 stable branch. > > >> Beneath is one of them: > > >> > > >> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-src/2005-February/039863.html > > >> > > >> Is the ULE scheduler still far from stable in RELENG_5 or not? > > > > > > You can now compile a kernel with options SCHED_ULE again. How well it > > > works > > > is for yourself to determine :-) (I've been using it on my UP machine= here > > > since yesterday only). > >=20 > > Hi there > >=20 > > I've been using only SCHED_ULE on my UP WS, even when there was #error > > def. It never broke, not even once :) Though I think there's trouble > > with SMP and/or HTT. I tried it once on a P4 and it paniced. > >=20 > > On the other hand, using SCHED_ULE improves sound quality and general > > system 'response' concerning GUI... don't know 'bout performance. >=20 > By any chance does it help with copying from ata disks on different > controllers ? For me on large files this brings up "swap_pager: > indefinite wait buffer" with 4BSD. That doesn't sound like a scheduler problem, rather a hardware or ata driver problem. Did you try sos' new driver yet? Kris --S1BNGpv0yoYahz37 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFCCOsyWry0BWjoQKURAluwAKCr3w/NHl4r30t/nnOdbnE1ID3agwCeIW62 B0ieVryaLSKdUTQaCRblC6k= =sUhy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --S1BNGpv0yoYahz37--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050208163915.GC43054>