Am Montag 09 April 2007 schrieb Mike Galbraith: > On Mon, 2007-04-09 at 07:26 -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote: > > On Monday 09 April 2007 01:38, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > On Sun, 2007-04-08 at 09:08 -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I am one of those who have been happily testing Con's patches. > > > > > > > > They work better than mainline here. > > > > > > (I tried a UP kernel yesterday, and even a single kernel build > > > would make noticeable hitches if I move a window around. YMMV etc.) > > > > Interesting. I run UP amd64, 1000HZ, 1.25G, preempt off (on causes > > kernel stalls with no messages - but that is another story). I do > > not notice a single make. When several are running the desktop > > slows down a bit. I do not have X niced. Wonder why we see such > > different results? > > Probably because with your processor, in general cc1 can get the job > done faster, as can X. The latency big hit happens when you hit the > end of the rotation. You simply don't hit it as often as I do. Anyone > with an old PIII box should hit the wall very quickly indeed. I > haven't had time to try it here.
Hi! I am running 2.6.20.7 + sd-0.44 on an IBM ThinkPad T23 that I use as my Amarok machine[1]. It has a Pentium 3 with 1.13 GHz using ondemand frequency scaling and XFS as filesystem. So far music playback has been perfect even when I had it building kernel packages while wildly clicking around starting apps and then moving the Amarok window like mad while solid window moving is enabled. Amarok / xine continued to play the music totally unimpressed of that. So for me from a users point of view who wants good music playback *no matter what*, this is already perfect. Also the desktop feels quite snappy to me. It was only slow on anything I/O bound but thats understandable IMHO when make-kpkg tar -bzips the kernel source while 20 KDE applications are starting and Amarok plays music. Should I try any specific tests? This also goes out to anybody else, especially to you, Con. So if you want me to run some benchmarks, please tell me. I am not experienced in benchmarking, but if you tell me what to do, I can try it out. I prefer benchmarks that do not disrupt music playback, but can run more aggressive benchmarks over night. I think it might be good to use a benchmark that isn't I/O bound to really test the scheduler... but as said I am no expert on that and real life loads usually are I/O bound as well. Have to have an carefully eye on the harddisk though... Apr 22 11:51:06 deepdance smartd[3116]: Device: /dev/sda, SMART Prefailure Attribute: 3 Spin_Up_Time changed from 154 to 150 (well threshold is at 033, so still plenty to go, hope it will take some time till the next change) [1] http://martin-steigerwald.de/amarok-machine/ ;) Regards, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/