Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

RIFS-ES Linux Kernel Scheduler Released

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

  • #71
    Originally posted by kernelOfTruth View Post
    lol - it seems that BFS + your tweaks challenge btrfs and the kernel quite a lot



    now I can't use it anymore

    good thing to know that


    hopefully ZFS works well enough

    I'd rather have a filesystem show errors at the beginning when attempting to copy data on it - instead of when I need to access stuff on it

    it was only a test but nonetheless ...

    Comment


    • #72
      update:

      OMG - thank you so much Chen !

      you're da man


      kudos to you and Con



      in the past there have always been issues when using ZFS + 2 audio streams or other stuff (e.g. scrolling in the web and entering text)

      the result was that the computer effectively wasn't usable for anything else than running the backup job of ZFS and playing one audio track with hickups from time to time


      currently I'm running geek-sources 3.4.2 with ck-patchset ck2 for 3.4 kernel

      BFS 423 patched to 424 (is supposed to fix some i/o interactivity issues) and added your O(1) tweaks


      this is the best desktop kernel by far - since EVER


      having the data integrity features ZFS available and at the same time fully smooth desktop experience is full win-win in my books



      thanks again !


      now we only need to convince Con to include those (and/or additional upcoming) tweaks from you into BFS


      best of course would be to add BFS to mainline as an option to select for desktop users ...


      edit:

      ok, there's still the issue that HD videos (720p+) act slightly jerky but the sound in 99% is consistent

      so ZFSonLinux still needs some tweaking until it is fully suited for desktop/multimedia usage


      can't believe how much the CPU scheduler alone makes a difference in those things




      I'm using some additional CFQ tweaks - they also might help:

      echo cfq > /sys/block/sda/queue/scheduler
      echo 10000 > /sys/block/sda/queue/iosched/fifo_expire_async
      echo 250 > /sys/block/sda/queue/iosched/fifo_expire_sync
      echo 80 > /sys/block/sda/queue/iosched/slice_async
      echo 1 > /sys/block/sda/queue/iosched/low_latency
      echo 6 > /sys/block/sda/queue/iosched/quantum
      echo 5 > /sys/block/sda/queue/iosched/slice_async_rq
      echo 3 > /sys/block/sda/queue/iosched/slice_idle
      echo 100 > /sys/block/sda/queue/iosched/slice_sync
      source: http://unix.stackexchange.com/questi...system-caching
      Last edited by kernelOfTruth; 07-03-2012, 09:44 AM.

      Comment


      • #73
        Originally posted by kernelOfTruth View Post
        update:

        OMG - thank you so much Chen !

        you're da man


        kudos to you and Con



        in the past there have always been issues when using ZFS + 2 audio streams or other stuff (e.g. scrolling in the web and entering text)

        the result was that the computer effectively wasn't usable for anything else than running the backup job of ZFS and playing one audio track with hickups from time to time


        currently I'm running geek-sources 3.4.2 with ck-patchset ck2 for 3.4 kernel

        BFS 423 patched to 424 (is supposed to fix some i/o interactivity issues) and added your O(1) tweaks


        this is the best desktop kernel by far - since EVER


        having the data integrity features ZFS available and at the same time fully smooth desktop experience is full win-win in my books



        thanks again !


        now we only need to convince Con to include those (and/or additional upcoming) tweaks from you into BFS


        best of course would be to add BFS to mainline as an option to select for desktop users ...


        edit:

        ok, there's still the issue that HD videos (720p+) act slightly jerky but the sound in 99% is consistent

        so ZFSonLinux still needs some tweaking until it is fully suited for desktop/multimedia usage


        can't believe how much the CPU scheduler alone makes a difference in those things




        I'm using some additional CFQ tweaks - they also might help:



        source: http://unix.stackexchange.com/questi...system-caching
        Yeah, I have just updated it. . The issues you have is caused by enqueue_task, enqueue_task_head and dequeue_task. I have rewritten them.

        CPU scheduler can affect the performance because all the task have to be scheduled in a right way to get the best result
        Thanks you for helping me to test when I am busy.
        Chen
        Last edited by 3766691; 07-03-2012, 11:13 AM.

        Comment


        • #74
          Originally posted by 3766691 View Post
          Yeah, I have just updated it. . The issues you have is caused by enqueue_task, enqueue_task_head and dequeue_task. I have rewritten them.

          CPU scheduler can affect the performance because all the task have to be scheduled in a right way to get the best result
          Thanks you for helping me to test when I am busy.
          Chen

          could you please re-upload it ?

          it says uploaded 50 minutes ago but it's identical to the one downloaded approx. 19 hours ago and currently using

          *fingers crossed* that btrfs doesn't make that much trouble with the updated one


          I see - didn't know that there's that much to be managed


          sure, desktop performance/interactivity has been in a pretty bad state for me since 2.6.34 or even around 2.6.2* - so I'm glad I could help testing & pushing better alternatives forward


          thanks !

          Comment


          • #75
            Originally posted by kernelOfTruth View Post
            could you please re-upload it ?

            it says uploaded 50 minutes ago but it's identical to the one downloaded approx. 19 hours ago and currently using

            *fingers crossed* that btrfs doesn't make that much trouble with the updated one


            I see - didn't know that there's that much to be managed


            sure, desktop performance/interactivity has been in a pretty bad state for me since 2.6.34 or even around 2.6.2* - so I'm glad I could help testing & pushing better alternatives forward


            thanks !
            This one is already the newest one and the queuing helper is a bit different.They are just bugfix.
            Yes the interactivity is really bad with 2.6 vanilla.Music stucks, jerky, etc...

            Comment


            • #76
              Originally posted by kernelOfTruth View Post
              could you please re-upload it ?

              it says uploaded 50 minutes ago but it's identical to the one downloaded approx. 19 hours ago and currently using

              *fingers crossed* that btrfs doesn't make that much trouble with the updated one


              I see - didn't know that there's that much to be managed


              sure, desktop performance/interactivity has been in a pretty bad state for me since 2.6.34 or even around 2.6.2* - so I'm glad I could help testing & pushing better alternatives forward


              thanks !
              Before the sleeper fairness feature is included, the desktop performance is snappy.
              With SD Scheduler the 2.6.21 kernel ran as snappy as BFS. However after 2.6.28, the desktop is not snappy anymore.

              Edit
              Now not only CFS is unfair, the people is being treated unfairly.
              The case we are having now is, the things that comes from the kernel developer are usually being correct(Ok..usually..). That is the unfairness.
              Last edited by 3766691; 07-04-2012, 12:54 PM.

              Comment


              • #77
                Originally posted by 3766691 View Post
                Before the sleeper fairness feature is included, the desktop performance is snappy.
                With SD Scheduler the 2.6.21 kernel ran as snappy as BFS. However after 2.6.28, the desktop is not snappy anymore.

                Edit
                Now not only CFS is unfair, the people is being treated unfairly.
                The case we are having now is, the things that comes from the kernel developer are usually being correct(Ok..usually..). That is the unfairness.
                yes, afaik I had a pretty nice patchset back then for 2.6.20 or 2.6.22 - with all necessary stuff included (grsecurity, etc.)

                the responsiveness under load was insane/awesome ^^

                good old times

                /sniff


                the recent cpu scheduler work on CFS might be good for big clusters and/or big boxen but for desktop there's simply too much overhead and unfairness involved

                also Linus & Ingo don't seem to care too much about desktop users

                or aren't that much affected yet to care enough

                Comment


                • #78
                  Originally posted by kernelOfTruth View Post
                  yes, afaik I had a pretty nice patchset back then for 2.6.20 or 2.6.22 - with all necessary stuff included (grsecurity, etc.)

                  the responsiveness under load was insane/awesome ^^

                  good old times

                  /sniff


                  the recent cpu scheduler work on CFS might be good for big clusters and/or big boxen but for desktop there's simply too much overhead and unfairness involved

                  also Linus & Ingo don't seem to care too much about desktop users

                  or aren't that much affected yet to care enough
                  Anyway I have posted DMS-V1 fixed version just now. It doesn't use timeslice as a measurement of the quantum of a running task anymore.Benchmarks are attached to show that DMS can make super-low latency environment and it also shows that DMS is fair. DMS should not be used with ridicious load and it fits normal desktop load.

                  Edit
                  DMS can also fit the realtime environment for example airplane(These device needs low latency and they are used in critical environment)
                  Last edited by 3766691; 07-05-2012, 09:58 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #79
                    Originally posted by kernelOfTruth View Post
                    yes, afaik I had a pretty nice patchset back then for 2.6.20 or 2.6.22 - with all necessary stuff included (grsecurity, etc.)

                    the responsiveness under load was insane/awesome ^^

                    good old times

                    /sniff


                    the recent cpu scheduler work on CFS might be good for big clusters and/or big boxen but for desktop there's simply too much overhead and unfairness involved

                    also Linus & Ingo don't seem to care too much about desktop users

                    or aren't that much affected yet to care enough
                    Yes,they don't

                    Comment


                    • #80
                      Originally posted by kernelOfTruth View Post
                      yes, afaik I had a pretty nice patchset back then for 2.6.20 or 2.6.22 - with all necessary stuff included (grsecurity, etc.)

                      the responsiveness under load was insane/awesome ^^

                      good old times

                      /sniff


                      the recent cpu scheduler work on CFS might be good for big clusters and/or big boxen but for desktop there's simply too much overhead and unfairness involved

                      also Linus & Ingo don't seem to care too much about desktop users

                      or aren't that much affected yet to care enough
                      Quite sorry for that. I don't have any old compiler.:-(

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X