From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S272318AbTHELD7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Aug 2003 07:03:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S272644AbTHELD7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Aug 2003 07:03:59 -0400 Received: from dyn-ctb-203-221-74-83.webone.com.au ([203.221.74.83]:41478 "EHLO chimp.local.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S272318AbTHELDv (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Aug 2003 07:03:51 -0400 Message-ID: <3F2F8F0E.5060108@cyberone.com.au> Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 21:03:42 +1000 From: Nick Piggin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3.1) Gecko/20030618 Debian/1.3.1-3 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Con Kolivas CC: linux kernel mailing list , Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar , Felipe Alfaro Solana Subject: Re: [PATCH] O13int for interactivity References: <200308050207.18096.kernel@kolivas.org> <200308052045.39476.kernel@kolivas.org> <3F2F8B77.4020107@cyberone.com.au> <200308052056.38861.kernel@kolivas.org> In-Reply-To: <200308052056.38861.kernel@kolivas.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Con Kolivas wrote: >On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 20:48, Nick Piggin wrote: > >>Con Kolivas wrote: >> >>>On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 20:32, Nick Piggin wrote: >>> >>>>What you are doing is restricting some range so it can adapt more quickly >>>>right? So you still have the problem in the cases where you are not >>>>restricting this range. >>>> >>>Avoiding it becoming interactive in the first place is the answer. >>>Anything more rapid and X dies dead as soon as you start moving a window >>>for example, and new apps are seen as cpu hogs during startup and will >>>take _forever_ to start under load. It's a tricky juggling act and I keep >>>throwing more balls at it. >>> >>Well, what if you give less boost for sleeping? >> > >Then it takes longer to become interactive. Take 2.6.0-test2 vanilla - audio >apps can take up to a minute to be seen as fully interactive; whether this is >a problem for your hardware or not is another matter but clearly they are >interactive using <1% cpu time on the whole. > I think this is a big problem, a minute is much too long. I guess its taking this long to build up because X needs a great deal of inertia so that it can stay in a highly interactive state right? If so then it seems the interactivity estimator does not have enough information to work properly for X. In which case maybe X needs to be reniced, or backboosted, or have _something_ done to help out.