From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965564AbXCQOFN (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Mar 2007 10:05:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965551AbXCQOFN (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Mar 2007 10:05:13 -0400 Received: from aeimail.aei.ca ([206.123.6.84]:52200 "EHLO aeimail.aei.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965565AbXCQOFM (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Mar 2007 10:05:12 -0400 From: Ed Tomlinson To: jos poortvliet Subject: Re: [ck] Re: RSDL v0.31 Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 10:04:13 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 Cc: ck@vds.kolivas.org, Ingo Molnar , Nicholas Miell , Al Boldi , Mike Galbraith , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds References: <200703042335.26785.a1426z@gawab.com> <20070317075615.GC13685@elte.hu> <200703171207.15221.jos@mijnkamer.nl> In-Reply-To: <200703171207.15221.jos@mijnkamer.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-6" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200703171004.13913.edt@aei.ca> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Saturday 17 March 2007 07:07, jos poortvliet wrote: > Op Saturday 17 March 2007, schreef Ingo Molnar: > > so it is not at all clear to me that RSDL is indeed an improvement, if > > it does not have comparable auto-nice properties. > > Wasn't the point of RSDL to get rid of the auto-nice, because it caused > starvation, unpredictable behaviour and other problems? > > Anyway, I think it's a good thing we keep having a look at mike's problem, but > it's not clear to me how far he got in solving it. Does the latest patch > solve the interactivity problem, providing X is niced -10 (or something)??? > > If it does, I think that's the solution - at least until the X ppl fix X > itself. Distributions can just go back renicing X (they did that before, > after all), and the biggest problem is fixed. Then all other users can have > the improvements RSDL offers, the developers can rejoice over the simpler and > cleaner design and code, and everybody is happy. > > If it doesn't solve the problem, more work is in order. I think ignoring a > clear regression to mainline, no matter how rare, isn't smart. It might > indicate an underlying problem, and even if it doesn't - you don't want ppl > complaining the new kernel isn't interactive anymore or something... Ingo, The other point to make here is that you only need to nice X if you are heavily overloading the box. Here X is NOT niced and RSDL 0.30 is giving me better performance. Ed Tomlinson