> > Not that it seems that Michel reported far worse behaviour than what I > > saw, including pretty hickup'ish X behaviour even without the fair group > > scheduler compared to 2.6.23. It might be because he's running X niced > > to -1 (I leave X at 0 and let the scheduler deal with it in general) > > though. > > Hmm ..with X niced to -1, it should get more cpu power leading to a > better desktop experience.
It depends as X can end up starving it's own clients, especially with a compositing manager or other fancy window manager... > Michel, > You had reported that commit 810e95ccd58d91369191aa4ecc9e6d4a10d8d0c8 > was the cause for this bad behavior. Do you see behavior change (from > good->bad) > immediately after applying that patch during your bisect process? Also Michel, double check your .config in both cases. > I would prefer to have CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED + > CONFIG_FAIR_CGROUP_SCHED on by default. Can you pls let me know how you > think is the desktop experience with that combination? I'm going to give that a try but unfortunately, it will have to wait until I'm back from LCA in a bit more than a week. Ben. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
