James Rayner wrote:
Ok, I asked Con Kolivas about which pre-emption to enable, and he
firmly said none. For those that dont know, Con Kolivas is the author
of the CK kernel patches, which contain his awesome Staircase
scheduler, and other interactivity related improvements. His work is
what ArchCK is built around.
He's probably the most knowledgable of us all about kernel based
issues, and I'm inclined to agree, I've seen no benefit with pre-empt
of any sort.
James
Not to mention that Con is an Aussie, so of course he knows what he's
talking about :P
On 9/7/05, Joe Giles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
RedShift wrote:
Joe Giles wrote:
Philip Dillon-Thiselton wrote:
Ok - this time I'll build based on the current Arch config, which
should help and add a devfs warning to the install too. Anyone have
suggestions about which pre-empt we should be using? I have been
using the not-voluntary one as I believe that is the one applied by
ck and so the advantageous one (i.e. the point of the patchset :)) -
and how about kexec?...
Phil
James Rayner wrote:
ArchCK is a derivation of the CK patchset that is taking a similar
path to the old CKO patchset. It aims to include a variety of popular
features and updates that have not currently made it to the vanilla
kernel. Con Kolivas' CK patchset is the core of ArchCK and wouldnt
exist without it (thanks Con).
Patch (Apply patch to 2.6.13):
http://iphitus.loudas.com/arch/ck/patch-2.6.13-archck2.bz2
Website:
http://iphitus.loudas.com/archck.php
Changes from 2.6.13-archck1:
updated to 2.6.13-ck2
updated acpi patch to 2/9
updated reiser4 to reiser4 from 2.6.13-mm1
Arch Linux Users, archck is available in the community repository, to
get it, add the community repo and pacman -S kernel26archck. It
should be updated sometime this week
If anyone has any issues with this, drop me a line.
Enjoy,
James Rayner
/iphitus
_______________________________________________
arch mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
I agree. The Preemptible Kernel (Low-Latency Desktop) (Third option)
seems to offer better desktop responsiveness. I haven't extensively
tested this, but I have heard it does make a difference.
Preemptible kernel? You mean the current kernel that we use is
cooperative???
Well, there are currently 3 options in the kernel config:
No Forced Preemption (Server)
Voluntary Kernel Preemption (Desktop)
Preemptible Kernel (Low-Latency Desktop)
The third option from what I hear offers the best desktop experiance as
the kernel will allow other process to have CPU time even thought
another process with either a higher priority or was first in the sched
is waiting for processing.
The kexec system call feature is interesting. I would like to test
that more too, but have no clue how to yet. I always thought it would
be cool to unload and reload kernels without rebooting :)
Whoah, that gets me horny.
Yeah, Me too :)
I will try to read up on it. However, it is experimental and not sure
what Arch's policy is on experimental support for features in the
kernel.
You can always make yourself a pkgbuild...
Just my 2 cents..
Joe
_______________________________________________
arch mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
_______________________________________________
arch mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
_______________________________________________
arch mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
Interesting. Maybe the new kernels don't really have a need for
pre-emption. I know the early 2.5 and 2.6 kernels benefited from it and
Robert Love spent a great deal of time promoting it. But, if Con says
its not necessary, then I'm with you. He is an awesome kernel hacker and
I would respect his guidance.
Thanks!!!
Joe
_______________________________________________
arch mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
