From: Soeren Sonnenburg <kernel@nn7.de>
To: Mark Hahn <hahn@physics.mcmaster.ca>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: xterm scrolling speed - scheduling weirdness in 2.6 ?!
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 21:19:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1073161172.9851.260.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0401031439060.24942-100000@coffee.psychology.mcmaster.ca>
On Sat, 2004-01-03 at 20:40, Mark Hahn wrote:
> > yeah, I think so... but as generating output in a shell is a very common
> > thing to do there should either be an option to turn that unwanted
> > behaviour off or to fix this issue...
>
> has anyone said it's desired behavior? you probably need to describe
> your setup more. for instance, is your X niced to negative? are there
> some background processes which would be consuming cycles?
freshly booted system with X running at niceness 0 no other processes consume cpu cycles.
it is reproducable by creating any kind of output which reads from disk... so
i.e. a find ./ in my home directory takes sometimes like 30 minutes on
2.6 (100%cpu load) and sometimes 5 minutes (on 2.4 always 5 minutes
~40%load).
dmesg is another candidate... just doing cat <file> seems not to trigger
that problem.
As Willy Tarreau also oberves this very same weirdness - I now know the
problem is there and it is not specific to my setup.
Soeren.
next parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-03 20:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.44.0401031439060.24942-100000@coffee.psychology.mcmaster.ca>
2004-01-03 20:19 ` Soeren Sonnenburg [this message]
2004-01-03 21:00 ` xterm scrolling speed - scheduling weirdness in 2.6 ?! Con Kolivas
2004-01-03 21:10 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-03 21:15 ` Con Kolivas
2004-01-03 23:35 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-01-04 0:11 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-04 1:42 ` Con Kolivas
2004-01-04 3:32 ` Tim Connors
2004-01-04 5:58 ` Con Kolivas
2004-01-06 1:09 ` Peter Osterlund
2004-01-06 1:37 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-06 2:28 ` Peter Osterlund
2004-01-06 2:50 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-06 6:27 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-05 22:25 ` Bryan Whitehead
2004-01-04 8:09 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-04 8:49 ` Con Kolivas
2004-01-04 11:13 ` Martin Schlemmer
2004-01-04 11:24 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-04 12:45 ` Con Kolivas
2004-01-04 14:42 ` Martin Schlemmer
2004-01-04 18:40 ` mikeg
2004-01-04 22:58 ` szonyi calin
2004-01-04 23:33 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-01-04 23:44 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2004-01-04 23:47 ` Mike Fedyk
2004-01-05 8:39 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-05 20:38 ` Martin Schlemmer
2004-01-05 9:18 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-05 17:20 ` Martin Schlemmer
2004-01-05 17:21 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-01-05 9:50 ` Kenneth Johansson
2004-01-05 10:17 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-04-02 18:22 ` solved (was Re: xterm scrolling speed - scheduling weirdness in 2.6 ?!) Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-04-03 5:35 ` Tim Connors
2004-04-03 6:06 ` Tim Connors
2004-04-03 14:11 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-01-05 8:26 ` xterm scrolling speed - scheduling weirdness in 2.6 ?! Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-04 8:54 ` Lincoln Dale
2004-01-04 9:17 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-04 10:24 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-04 11:12 ` Mike Fedyk
2004-01-04 11:17 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-04 11:20 ` Mike Fedyk
2004-01-04 11:19 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-01-05 0:48 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-04 11:46 ` Nicks's scheduler's OK [was Re: xterm scrolling speed - scheduling weirdness in 2.6 ?!] Willy Tarreau
2004-01-04 12:07 ` xterm scrolling speed - scheduling weirdness in 2.6 ?! Willy Tarreau
2004-01-05 0:51 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-05 18:37 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-01-06 0:33 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-04 10:11 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-05 10:31 ` venom
2004-01-03 21:18 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-01-03 21:39 Bob Gill
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.44.0401031402210.24942-100000@coffee.psychology.mcmaster.ca>
2004-01-03 19:07 ` Soeren Sonnenburg
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-01-03 18:52 Soeren Sonnenburg
2004-01-03 19:19 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-01-04 20:47 ` Peter Chubb
2004-01-04 20:54 ` Willy TARREAU
2004-01-05 3:46 ` Peter Chubb
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1073161172.9851.260.camel@localhost \
--to=kernel@nn7.de \
--cc=hahn@physics.mcmaster.ca \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.