From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 18 19:02:09 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1233) id AFFE4106566B; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:02:09 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:02:09 +0000 From: Alexander Best To: Rob Farmer Message-ID: <20101118190209.GA45054@freebsd.org> References: <4CE50849.106@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <4CE52177.3020306@freebsd.org> <20101118182324.GA36312@freebsd.org> <39F4F32E-A30C-47F3-AD69-F7777A7E30A8@mac.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Current , FreeBSD Stable Subject: Re: TTY task group scheduling 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, 18 Nov 2010 19:02:09 -0000 On Thu Nov 18 10, Rob Farmer wrote: > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 10:39, Chuck Swiger wrote: > > Frankly, I'm also turned off by the attempt to popup a full page ad in addition to the rest of the advertising content which surrounds what is nominally supposed to be the real content.  That doesn't mean there is anything wrong with the patch or the notion of adjusting the scheduler, but I don't see any value added from these phoronix.com links. > > Most stuff on Phoronix is of dubious value, and they have outright > lied about stuff in the past, in order to drum up advertising business > (such as Steam on Linux, which Value has consistently said isn't > happening). so we need a trusted source to check whether the impact of the ~200 line patch as claimed by phoronix remains valid. can anybody test this? or provide links to independant benchmark results? cheers. alex > > -- > Rob Farmer -- a13x