Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 73

Thread: Two Years With Linux BFS, The Brain Fuck Scheduler

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,798

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by misiu_mp View Post
    Take it easy. I didn't have problems understanding the phrase "millions hz" in the meaning of "a hole lot of hz". I don't think many would have problems doing so either.
    That's not the problem. The problem is that it's not even 1Hz more. Not even 1! And yet he runs around with his "1 million Hz" BS. So no, it's not "a hole lot of hz." It's exactly the same as without BFS.

    He just makes me wanna shoot bunnies every time he posts.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1

    Default CK delivered an unmatched desktop experience

    I remember the last line of CK patches (kernel 2.4).

    The use experience delivered was unmatched! My modern x-Core machine does not as flawlessly play mp3s while several other tasks are running.

    And that old thing was not even a new machine, when I bought it. But everybody who tried it was impressed, telling stories how their high-end hardware running other Linux kernels or Windows XP would start to stutter, when you would copy lots of data from A to B and stuff.

    So the right test indeed would be to start all these tests that have been conducted simultaneously and play an mp3 or a video at the same time and then see, what happens.

  3. #43

    Default tales from the future

    Quote Originally Posted by RealNC View Post
    That's not the problem. The problem is that it's not even 1Hz more. Not even 1! And yet he runs around with his "1 million Hz" BS. So no, it's not "a hole lot of hz." It's exactly the same as without BFS.

    He just makes me wanna shoot bunnies every time he posts.
    It's your fault you've got problems with the things I didn't say, so stop your imaginary bullshit. You have no problems in blaming Linux overall, but you can't stand someone can blame your lovely BFS (what's more funny I didn't even blame it here). Next time when you'll give me some advices begin from yourself. When Con posts stupid patches like 10kHz (ten times more than standard) then it's hard to take sersiously something called brain f*uck scheduler. Someone said interesting thing about BFS thoroughput which was very good in Phoronix benchmarks as a proof it introduces better latency (which wasn't measured) with no cost in thoroughput. It can be like this, but the risky 10kHz patch I mentioned before can make some people wonder if there aren't downsides in other areas like safety etc. Just speculation, but not unfounded.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,798

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    It's your fault you've got problems with the things I didn't say, so stop your imaginary bullshit. You have no problems in blaming Linux overall, but you can't stand someone can blame your lovely BFS (what's more funny I didn't even blame it here). Next time when you'll give me some advices begin from yourself. When Con posts stupid patches like 10kHz (ten times more than standard) then it's hard to take sersiously something called brain f*uck scheduler. Someone said interesting thing about BFS thoroughput which was very good in Phoronix benchmarks as a proof it introduces better latency (which wasn't measured) with no cost in thoroughput. It can be like this, but the risky 10kHz patch I mentioned before can make some people wonder if there aren't downsides in other areas like safety etc. Just speculation, but not unfounded.
    I already told you that the patch you're talking about has a warning in it for stupid users that they shouldn't use it. What the fuck is your problem? Is your needle stuck?

    Here's what the patch says:

    "There's some really badly broken software out there that is entirely dependant on HZ for its maximum performance. Raise the maximum HZ value to some higher and slightly unreasonable values up to some higher and completely obscene values."

    "10000 Hz is an obscene value to use to run broken software that is Hz limited. Being over 1000, driver breakage is likely."

    What part of "there's some really badly broken software out there that is entirely dependant on HZ for its maximum performance" don't you understand?
    Last edited by RealNC; 08-17-2011 at 07:08 AM.

  5. #45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealNC View Post
    I already told you that the patch you're talking about has a warning in it for stupid users that they shouldn't use it. What the fuck is your problem? Is your needle stuck?
    Then what users should use it?

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    418

    Default

    Ok, maybe time to calm down a bit. It seems that both Kraftman and RealNC says the same thing? Or? No need to argue. Let us all conclude that BFS gives better responsiveness and let it stay there. Ok?

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    Then what users should use it?
    If you have to ask then this patch is not for you.

    As the patch says, there is broken software that behaves better with obscene Hz values. Users who happen to rely on such software will be well aware of this issue and will appreciate the additional flexibility over CFS or default BFS. The rest will ignore it as if it never existed.

    BFS works at the same Hz as CFS but offers improved responsiveness to some users. That's good enough for me.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    174

    Default

    RealNC, Kraftman, you argue like a married couple before a divorce. With spit and venom. Have you met in real life yet?

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,798

    Default

    I hope not :-/

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    172

    Default

    Maybe a good benchmark would be to record many streams of audio simultaneously via ardour and see how low you can get the buffer sizes in jack before xruns happen.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •