From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 3 21:22:20 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83F6A106567E for ; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 21:22:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jroberson@jroberson.net) Received: from mail-pz0-f44.google.com (mail-pz0-f44.google.com [209.85.210.44]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60EFB8FC0C for ; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 21:22:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pzk32 with SMTP id 32so6851274pzk.3 for ; Thu, 03 Nov 2011 14:22:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.50.169.99 with SMTP id ad3mr6947279igc.6.1320355339520; Thu, 03 Nov 2011 14:22:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [72.253.42.56] ([72.253.42.56]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id fu10sm6050989igc.6.2011.11.03.14.22.17 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 03 Nov 2011 14:22:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 11:22:28 -1000 (HST) From: Jeff Roberson X-X-Sender: jroberson@desktop To: Ivan Klymenko In-Reply-To: <4eb3032e.a82eec0a.12ad.ffff8d64SMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> Message-ID: References: <4ea29f2c.a823440a.4aa0.3599SMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> <4eb3032e.a82eec0a.12ad.ffff8d64SMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Increase the degree of interactivity ULE scheduler X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 21:22:20 -0000 On Thu, 3 Nov 2011, Ivan Klymenko wrote: > Thank you for taking the time to answer me. > > ? Thu, 3 Nov 2011 10:21:48 -1000 (HST) > Jeff Roberson ?????: > >> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011, Ivan Klymenko wrote: >> >>> Hello people! >>> >>> I have: >>> CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T7250 @ 2.00GHz (1994.48-MHz >>> K8-class CPU) FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT r226607 amd64 >>> >>> For example during the building of the port lang/gcc46 in four >>> streams (-j 4) with a heavy load on the processor - use the system >>> was nearly impossible - responsiveness was terrible - the mouse >>> cursor sometimes froze on the spot a few seconds... >> >> Am I right in understanding that you have only two cores? > > Yes. > >> What else is running that achieves poor interactivity? > > This is mainly a compilation with make option -j >= ncpu*2 > And as an example - launching a large number of programs > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CLCp-dqWu0 > This patch allows me to make do with ULE nearly as well as with FBFS > Without the patch, somewhere in the middle of the time with ULE has > been difficult to control the mouse cursor. > >> What is the cpu utilization of your x server at this time? > > ~2.00% - 20.00% WCPU time... But sometimes there are up to 79%... > Upon unloading the CPU returns to normal... When the x server is down at 20% is it laggy? Can you tell me the priorities of the x server and the compile tasks? You can use the 'pri' keyword with ps and write a short script to log all priorities once per second during your test. That would be most helpful. Let me know if you need assistance with that. Jeff > >> >>> >>> I managed to achieve a significant increase in the degree of >>> interactivity ULE scheduler due to the following changes: >> >> This patch probably breaks nice, adaptive idling, and slows the >> interactivity computation. That being said I'm not sure why it helps >> you. >> >> It seems that there are increasing reports of bad interactivity >> creeping in to ULE over the last year. If people can help provide me >> with data I can look into this more. >> > > I'll be glad to provide data > >> Thanks for your report. >> >> Jeff > > How to repeat your tests on my system? > http://jeffr-tech.livejournal.com/24280.html > > Sorry for my english. > > Thanks! >