On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Josh Carroll wrote:
I'm confident that we can improve things. It will probably not make the
cut for 7.0 since it will be too disruptive. I'm sure it can be
backported before 7.1 when ULE is likely to become the default.
That sounds great! I figured it was something that would have to wait
until 7.0 released. I completely understand that.
I hope that we can continue to work together to verify any fixes I may
come up with.
Absolutely! Just let me know how I can help. If you need a guinea
pig...er...tester :) I'll be glad to help!
Could you try spot checking a couple of tests with kern.sched.slice set to
half its present value? 4BSD on average will use half the slice that ULE
will by default.
Another thing I noticed between ULE and 4BSD is my core temperatures
seem erratic on ULE. I use RRDtool with the new coretemp(4) feature
and noticed the temperatures are spiking a lot with ULE, and generally
slightly higher than when running a 4BSD kernel. I don't know if
that's significant or not. Just something I noticed when I modified my
RRD scripts to use coretemp.
For a side-by-side comparison, see this page:
http://pflog.net/~floyd/fbsd_sched.html
This is interesting. I have had a couple of laptop users report success
in using lower power saving modes with ULE. Are these core temp
observations repeatable?
Thanks,
Jeff
Thanks again for all your help! Please let me know if/when I can do
anything else to help out.
Regards,
Josh
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
