Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Two Years With Linux BFS, The Brain Fuck Scheduler

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Here is my take - purely subjective, a meta-comment if you will. I am a bit strange as I use Scientifc Linux as my desktop. And guess what, with its plain recompiled 2.6.32 kernel I have had no thrashing or lockup or mouse - jitters that always seem to follow me when I try Ubuntu. What do I run? A chess client, mplayer2, firefox with many tabs , a torrent application and maybe rhythmbox.

    I have alwasy thought that half the problem of jittery systems is simply too many unneeded background services running.
    Maybe a properly tuned system is all most people need.
    I have no opinion about how good BFS is itself as I don't use it.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by kraftman View Post
      It's not the FUD. Con allowed you to use at least 10kHz which was stupid. I'm not talking about recommendations, but about ability.
      No, BFS does not allow that. Show me where it does that. All I can find is a specific patch in the -ck patchset (which BFS is part of, not vice versa). BFS does not alter the HZ choices in any way.

      It seems you don't have a clue or your logic fails, because I didn't even mention BFS, but CFS.
      Who are you trying to BS, kraftman? Here's what you said:

      "I know CFS doesn't allow you to use millions Hz as a timer frequency, but some people explained it's a dumb stupid idea."

      suggesting that BFS does allow you to use 1000000Hz. If you lack the ability to communicate properly, maybe you should refrain from trying.

      As far I can see it's you who does FUD here. You didn't even care to explain what's so terribly wrong with CFS in Linux 3.0.
      I'll tell you what's wrong with it; the whole GUI starts lagging and frame skipping when CPU load approaches the 90-100 range and Jack is dropping samples (resulting in weird noises) every 5 seconds. That's what's wrong with it.

      You were also FUDing about KDE while the problems you were experiencing were your fault, but let's focus on schedulers.
      Sure, go grave digging about other issues in a vain attempt to direct attention away from your current FUD spreading.

      Care to explain? It seems you didn't realize what I'm talking about.
      That's the problem. You don't care to explain what you're talking about, even though you know you're being ambiguous. You didn't mean to suggest that BFS uses 1 million HZ values? Then why the hell did you make it look like that's what you meant?

      As far as I remember your problems were related to unstable graphic drivers.
      Both stable and unstable.


      How CFS could mess up your performance with KDE?
      That's easy. Kwin animation produce CPU load. When that happens, KDE craps out, because CFS in 3.0(.1) does that for any kind of CPU load, not just the one coming from Kwin itself.

      Again, care to explain what was wrong? 3.0.1 and 3.0 is not the same, so maybe it wasn't BFS which fixed your problems, but DRM or something. Your "proof" is no more.
      No. I was using 3.0.1 before I applied the BFS patch to it. And I can back it up, because of the first comment on this blog post.

      You're making me laugh. While you didn't even know what I was talking about and you started your biased talk about BFS (which I didn't even mention) it's you who's clueless (as ever).
      Sure, you start commenting how it's broken on a thread that's about BFS. Next time someone starts a thread about Indian food, I'll go and state how much I hate it and how bad it is for your health, and when someone asks why, I'll claim that I meant junk-fast-food restaurants in India and not Indian food per se.

      Grow up.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by RealNC View Post
        No, BFS does not allow that. Show me where it does that. All I can find is a specific patch in the -ck patchset (which BFS is part of, not vice versa). BFS does not alter the HZ choices in any way.
        Again no clue. Where did I say same BFS does allow you to do THAT?

        Who are you trying to BS, kraftman? Here's what you said:

        "I know CFS doesn't allow you to use millions Hz as a timer frequency, but some people explained it's a dumb stupid idea."

        suggesting that BFS does allow you to use 1000000Hz. If you lack the ability to communicate properly, maybe you should refrain from trying.
        I suggested Con allows you to use some big stupid frequency which is dumb. I could recommend you the same, but when comes to thinking and I also recommend you to stop putting some words in my mouth.

        I'll tell you what's wrong with it; the whole GUI starts lagging and frame skipping when CPU load approaches the 90-100 range and Jack is dropping samples (resulting in weird noises) every 5 seconds. That's what's wrong with it.
        We've got some progress, but you still have no clue:

        RealNC:

        http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...384#post220384

        ES seems to be useless with the open source r600g driver. KWin just crashes immediately.

        And regular OpenGL is slow as molasses :-D Amazing times for Linux desktops, yey! It feels as exciting as it was back 15 years ago. All hail the mighty Linux Desktop that is so much better than Windows 7 and OS X :-)

        Edit:
        Nah, I'm kidding. It just stinks.



        So let's take a look. Kwin crashes, because of...CFS! OpenGL is slow, because of...CFS!

        and you said later:

        More FUD. Those problems were fixed as soon as the kernel 3.0 BFS came out. It was the CFS scheduler that fucked up the performance of my system. With BFS + 3.0.1, everything is fine again. Oh, and my system is configured perfectly.

        Kraftman: clueless and ignorant as ever. And with proof, as is evident from the above.
        So I understand BFS fixed your slow OpenGL and Kwin crashes? Simply brilliant!*

        As for your other KDE and CFS problems it will be good to know what apps are you using for sound, what phonon backend, what kernel config.

        Sure, go grave digging about other issues in a vain attempt to direct attention away from your current FUD spreading.
        You have done this btw - *

        That's the problem. You don't care to explain what you're talking about, even though you know you're being ambiguous. You didn't mean to suggest that BFS uses 1 million HZ values? Then why the hell did you make it look like that's what you meant?
        You didn't care to explain what's wrong with CFS and 3.0, why should I care explaining what I meant?

        Both stable and unstable.
        Great, but it seems those problems weren't related to CFS, but some other problems you said NOW, so I couldn't know about them, could I?

        That's easy. Kwin animation produce CPU load. When that happens, KDE craps out, because CFS in 3.0(.1) does that for any kind of CPU load, not just the one coming from Kwin itself.
        This can be true, but not for crashing Kwin or slow OpenGL...

        No. I was using 3.0.1 before I applied the BFS patch to it. And I can back it up, because of the first comment on this blog post.
        Great, but it's about problems you have mentioned now and I"m not a prophet and I can't scan your brain.

        Sure, you start commenting how it's broken on a thread that's about BFS. Next time someone starts a thread about Indian food, I'll go and state how much I hate it and how bad it is for your health, and when someone asks why, I'll claim that I meant junk-fast-food restaurants in India and not Indian food per se.
        I won't comment how broken BFS is, because I didn't use it for long. I didn't like you were blaming CFS and didn't care to explain what's wrong with it. I was also making fun of some funny ability to use 10kHz timer option.

        Grow up.
        You should rather say: become a prophet or something, because I'm not aware of your problems if you didn't mention them before and those* which you mentioned doesn't seem to be CFS fault...

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by kraftman View Post
          Again no clue. Where did I say same BFS does allow you to do THAT?
          Here:

          Me: Kernel 3.0 is unusable for me without BFS. I mean really, a total piece of crap experience. Benchmark THAT.

          You: Care to explain what's wrong? I know CFS doesn't allow you to use millions Hz as a timer frequency [wtf is that? this is suggesting that CFS doesn't and BFS does], but some people explained it's a dumb stupid idea.

          Stop trying to weasel out of it with "but I didn't mean that, it's your fault for thinking that". Be a man. Say "I'm sorry, I miscommunicated it, so here's what I meant."

          So, what is it that you meant? And how does what you meant bear any relevance to this thread (which is about BFS and not some random, highly specialized, special circumstances, HZ altering -ck patch.)

          Comment


          • #20
            Jack isn't any better with BFS, you have to enable threaded interrupts and set irq priorities, THAT will make a BIG difference.
            ## VGA ##
            AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
            Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by RealNC View Post
              Here:

              Me: Kernel 3.0 is unusable for me without BFS. I mean really, a total piece of crap experience. Benchmark THAT.
              And I wanted to know why it's unusable.

              You: Care to explain what's wrong? I know CFS doesn't allow you to use millions Hz as a timer frequency [wtf is that? this is suggesting that CFS doesn't and BFS does], but some people explained it's a dumb stupid idea.
              This is suggesting you can use such high timer with BFS and it's also suggesting such ability is dumb. Con is a maker of BFS and the patch which allows you to use such high frequency and Ingo is a maker of CFS and he didn't make such funny patch.

              Stop trying to weasel out of it with "but I didn't mean that, it's your fault for thinking that". Be a man. Say "I'm sorry, I miscommunicated it, so here's what I meant."
              Don't be kidding me. Didn't I show it's you who had no clue? You were saying I'm FUDing while I just pointed to your problems with KDE. I was talking about your problems with KDE and unstable graphic drivers you were using to point it can be your fault when comes to your CFS problems. You said later BFS fixed them, but you meant it fixed different problems from the future which you mentioned later. Con should make some notice BFS can really brainf*ck your brain...

              So, what is it that you meant? And how does what you meant bear any relevance to this thread (which is about BFS and not some random, highly specialized, special circumstances, HZ altering -ck patch.)
              While it's about BFS it didn't stop you from bashing CFS. Con is a BFS maker and some can consider BFS is some kind of a toy while Con allows you to do such funny things like setting timer to 10KHz. Just a tiny "suggestion".

              Comment


              • #22
                With a name like that, I don't see it grabbing much traction. Just seems like a very ignorant approach.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by darkbasic View Post
                  Jack isn't any better with BFS, you have to enable threaded interrupts and set irq priorities, THAT will make a BIG difference.
                  Maybe it's not Jack itself, but the whole audio chain, from the synths up to Jack. Lots of processes involved. With BFS, I can use 64 frames/period, no problem and no audio drops. Total latency of everything combined is well under 6ms. With CFS, it craps out as soon as I actually start playing some synths and CPU load rises. I have to raise latencies up to 15ms to make it work reliably.

                  It's really like day and night.
                  Last edited by RealNC; 08-16-2011, 09:30 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                    So I understand BFS fixed your slow OpenGL and Kwin crashes? Simply brilliant!*
                    If BFS appears to fix kwin crashes, then that could indicate race conditions in kwin.

                    Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                    Maybe it's not Jack itself, but the whole audio chain, from the synths up to Jack. Lots of processes involved. With BFS, I can use 64 frames/period, no problem and no audio drops. Total latency of everything combined is well under 6ms. With CFS, it craps out as soon as I actually start playing some synths and CPU load rises. I have to raise latencies up to 15ms to make it work reliably.

                    It's really like day and night.
                    Did you try Linux 3.0 with automatic cgroups enabled? It is very good in that release. It should improve that situation.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I don't get why so many people are talking about these benchmarks being "useless" because they are missing the point of BFS.

                      I think, it is interesting to see how much raw performance you sacrifice (or even gain) when changing to BFS. These benchmarks suggest it's mostly a pretty good deal. Just maybe not for apache.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I stopped using BFS when i did benchmarks with i7-880. With an E8400 BFS improved compile speed, but with HT it did not matter at all if BFS was used or not. Also desktop performance improved a lot with mainline kernels. Basically i see no specific reason to patch a kernel, maybe increase HZ for better reaction time, but thats all.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Shining Arcanine View Post
                          Did you try Linux 3.0 with automatic cgroups enabled? It is very good in that release. It should improve that situation.
                          Yep, automatic grouping was enabled.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Kano View Post
                            I stopped using BFS when i did benchmarks with i7-880. With an E8400 BFS improved compile speed, but with HT it did not matter at all if BFS was used or not. Also desktop performance improved a lot with mainline kernels. Basically i see no specific reason to patch a kernel, maybe increase HZ for better reaction time, but thats all.
                            Yeah, but that's just people using powerful systems. Try a 2.4GHz E6600. Without BFS the GUI gets really bad.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by yoshi314 View Post
                              it's just too bad that BFS + systemd is still a no go :/ (no cgroup support).
                              Not sure what do you mean, i have been using BFS + systemd since almost a year ago without problems.

                              And yes, i have cgroups enabled (what bfs doesn't support is cpu load balancing inside the cgroup and other things, who isn't needed if you are using BFS anyway).

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                I've been using BFS for about a year on one of my machines, and yes it certainly feels more responsive when I do many cpu intensive tasks (rendering, encoding etc), however I'm using two other systems aswell with cfs and it's not like they are in any way unuseable, even under heavy load. So can we please pull back a little on the exaggerations? Also, as for the kernel shipping with cfs, is that surprising? AFAIK the main areas where Linux is used is where throughput is favoured over responsiveness. Having both schedulers available is great, so why fight!?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X