Another idea regarding your statistic:
It is not meant to show the latency of the overall system, but the performance of a single function ordering the loads compared?
(the logN efficiency you mentioned erlier)
Here is a newer benchmark around latt -c255 sleep 10 between these 3 cpu scheduler.
RIFS-ES-Low-Spec has been posted, if you want a link please click the follow site.
After using it if you think it is useful please invite the others to use it.
All right I am going to make a conclusion for the benchmark
Although BFS get the worst average latency but it also get the best max_latency value.
Last edited by 3766691; 06-21-2012 at 06:10 AM.
During the test I will move the mouse(I just move the mouse and I don't click anything).
With BFS the mouse stalls.
With CFS or RIFS-ES-Low-Spec the mouse is very smooth.
With average latency RIFS wins, with maximum latency BFS wins.
I just run a linux-3.4.4rc using the additional patch
No issues with audio as was before!
Very smooth experience with high load
compile + flash + video
all at the same time!
Thank you very mush Chen!
The BFS alternative will have issues with the newest linux-3.4.4
regarding a rpc patch as I pointed to at Kon Colivas blog.
If the mainline can make CFS smooth then RIFS will stop publishing.
The existance of RIFS is to make the kernel smooth.
If you want you can invite the other to us it, or you can hack the scheduler and post your hacking.
We have to let the maintainer to know that they should improve the desktop user experience now.
I am publishing my esperience here:
Siduction is an effective an little community around Debian unstable. Towo, the kernel guy there, had applied BFS patches for Linux-3.2 back then. But you dont have to use it to discuss in the forums. My main distribution yet is Gentoo, which is not only a "rollin' release" but a rolling MYrelease.