Originally posted by RealNC
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Two Years With Linux BFS, The Brain Fuck Scheduler
Collapse
X
-
tales from the future
-
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.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by misiu_mp View PostTake 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.
He just makes me wanna shoot bunnies every time he posts.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by RealNC View PostWhy the FUD? BFS recommends 1000Hz, not a million. Please show me where BFS recommends more than that. It's not even freakin' possible to use more than 1000Hz with BFS.
Ah, you mean the -ck patch, not BFS. You have no clue (again) what BFS is. And even the -ck patch in question even says that more than 1000Hz is only used for some broken software that depend on timer frequency and should not be used without a strong reason because it can break things.
You're a FUD spreader, kraftman. And the worst part is you know it, but simply don't give a shit.
"The million is sometimes used in the English language as a metaphor for a very large number, as in "Never in a million years" and "You're one in a million", or a hyperbole, as in "I've walked a million miles" and "You've asked the million dollar question"."
-Wikipedia
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by darkbasic View PostWhy don't you use 3.0.1-rt11? It's much better than BFS...
So why should I be using the -rt kernel for audio apps? And it seems there's some agreement on this:
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by RealNC View PostMaybe 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.
Leave a comment:
-
haha I just looked at Cons blog http://ck-hack.blogspot.com/ , and noticed that he had written an entry that basically says what I just did. Well I promise I'm not just regurgitating what he says, it just happens to be the truth
Leave a comment:
-
if these benchmarks prove anything, it is that there isn't really any loss of throughput by using the BFS scheduler. This is actually a very good thing when considering that the scheduler aims at improving the responsiveness of desktops (not throughput), and often when one attempts to improve responsiveness it comes at the the cost of throughput. So logically, this article only proves that there is no downside to BFS, while leaving untested its upside. As someone who has been using BFS for most of its existence, while also usually testing out the mainline CFS with each new kernel release, there is no question that BFS is an improvement over CFS responsiveness. CFS has definately caught up a lot over the past year, but the difference between the two is still noticeable on a desktop.
Leave a comment:
-
And please, Kraftman and RealNC, calm down. Your argument does not help anyone.
Back on topic: I heard that Con's patch helps responsiveness a lot. It seems some people agree on this. In that case, maybe the benchmark should include responiveness somehow? Are there any responsiveness benchmarks out there?
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: