Page 2 of 15 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 146

Thread: The v2 Rotary Interactivity Favor Scheduler

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    297

    Default

    3.3.5 with RIFS

  2. #12
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    GuangDong,China
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Naib View Post
    The lagging problem was gone after reboot and switching back to my backup kernel
    If you have time please try to boot with 3.3.x-RIFS and It is more easy for.me to figure out what prpblems RIFS has.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    GuangDong,China
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Naib View Post
    3.3.5 with RIFS
    Thanks. Does it handle imteractivity better than BFS with high workload ?For example is Firefox smooth even under high workload eg.make -j128 or even crazier like make -j512?
    Last edited by 3766691; 05-15-2012 at 10:07 AM.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    GuangDong,China
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Naib View Post
    3.3.5 with RIFS
    Thanks. Does it handle imteractivity better than BFS with high workload ?For example is Firefox smooth even under high workload eg.make -j128 or even crazier like make -j512?

    my sucky Android duplicate my message
    Last edited by 3766691; 05-15-2012 at 10:19 AM.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    32

    Default

    Where can we ask for support? I can't compile the kernel with this patch, must be doing something wrong (kind of new to the whole custom kernel scene)

  6. #16
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    GuangDong,China
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elmariachi View Post
    Where can we ask for support? I can't compile the kernel with this patch, must be doing something wrong (kind of new to the whole custom kernel scene)
    Oops.Could you send me your config.Also this patch is just availale for 3.3.x kernel right now

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    32

    Default

    It was me I had conflicting patches. Applied to vanilla 3.3.5 worked. It seems snappier, but that can also be placebo, I'll have to test some more. I also notice the lag when switching between apps, but I guess being snappy everywhere all the time is kind of utopic, no?

    Time to compile pacworld

  8. #18
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    GuangDong,China
    Posts
    141

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by elmariachi View Post
    It was me I had conflicting patches. Applied to vanilla 3.3.5 worked. It seems snappier, but that can also be placebo, I'll have to test some more. I also notice the lag when switching between apps, but I guess being snappy everywhere all the time is kind of utopic, no?

    Time to compile pacworld

    Thanks for giving comment. The reason why it performs snappier is because it don't use complex and unaccurate algorithum to give priority to interactive task.
    I 'm going to try using the algorithum RIFS has used and EEVDF to priovide a more fairer scheduling. The switches between user-interactive task is smoother than BFS with high workload. It seems lag when switching to a cpu intensive task from interactive task. ;-)
    Last edited by 3766691; 05-16-2012 at 10:00 AM.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    32

    Default

    Are you the main author of RIFS?
    forgot to say: I'm using it with deadline, it seems to be faster than BFQ or CFQ. Noop and deadline are faster for me (normal hdd, non-sdd)

    funny thing: governor set to performance, no dyn ticks, nothing to save energy on, and I get almost exactly the same temperature as with BFS with everything on "eco" mode... maybe it's not the scheduler, but it's funny
    Last edited by elmariachi; 05-16-2012 at 03:11 PM.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    GuangDong,China
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elmariachi View Post
    Are you the main author of RIFS?
    forgot to say: I'm using it with deadline, it seems to be faster than BFQ or CFQ. Noop and deadline are faster for me (normal hdd, non-sdd)
    Yes,

    Quote Originally Posted by elmariachi View Post
    funny thing: governor set to performance, no dyn ticks, nothing to save energy on, and I get almost exactly the same temperature as with BFS with everything on "eco" mode... maybe it's not the scheduler, but it's funny
    There are not much relationship between a CPU scheduler and the temperature.
    Also, RIFS handles interactivity better than BFS with high workload. You can just try make -j128 and play your music or browse webpage with Firefox. According to my test result, 3.3.1 with BFS hanged my box with make -j512, and the music stopped for more than 1 minute, but with BFS it won't.

Posting Permissions

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