Re: [ck] Re: SD still better than CFS for 3d ?(was Re: 2.6.23-rc1)

2007-07-30 Thread Rashkae
Martin Schwidefsky wrote: Do we care ? The code should be replaced with ptep_get_and_clear + pte_modify anyway.. Since the general direction of this thread was for people to test 3D game performance with the shiny new CFS cpu scheduler, I would say yes, we do care if people with the only

Re: [ck] Re: SD still better than CFS for 3d ?(was Re: 2.6.23-rc1)

2007-07-30 Thread Rashkae
Martin Schwidefsky wrote: Do we care ? The code should be replaced with ptep_get_and_clear + pte_modify anyway.. Since the general direction of this thread was for people to test 3D game performance with the shiny new CFS cpu scheduler, I would say yes, we do care if people with the only

Re: [ck] Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23

2007-07-24 Thread Rashkae
However, if we can improve basic page reclaim where it is obviously lacking, that is always preferable. eg: being a highly speculative operation, swap prefetch is not great for power efficiency -- but we still want laptop users to have a good experience as well, right? Sounds like something

Re: [ck] Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23

2007-07-24 Thread Rashkae
However, if we can improve basic page reclaim where it is obviously lacking, that is always preferable. eg: being a highly speculative operation, swap prefetch is not great for power efficiency -- but we still want laptop users to have a good experience as well, right? Sounds like something