Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 07 Nov 2003 12:02:37 +1300 | From | Dru <> | Subject | PROBLEM: Preemptible kernel makes mpg123 skip a lot under 2.6.0-testing7 and very high load average under low usage. |
| |
Con Kolivas wrote:
>Hi. > >I quote from your output: > > PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND >22953 andru 15 0 10100 5316 9464 S 3.7 0.6 2:02.39 mpg123 > 1067 root 5 -10 595m 58m 539m S 3.3 6.6 391:41.29 XFree86 > 1176 andru 15 0 47488 26m 13m S 1.0 3.0 11:52.32 gnome-terminal >25063 root 17 0 2004 1096 1792 R 0.7 0.1 0:00.03 top > >The kernel is now tuned to give much more priority to reniced tasks and it is >not recommended to run your X server nice -10. This is the cause of your >problem as X is starving your audio application. Some distributions do this >by default to get around the limitations of the old cpu scheduler not being >able to make X smooth enough at nice 0. This hack/workaround is no longer >recommended for 2.6 kernels. You will find nice performance of X at nice 0 >now and audio will not skip when the nice value of X is the same as your >audio application. > >Con > >
Hello all. i've still been testing the schedular for test7. Sorry havn't tried out testing9 yet, me and the computer have been having some emotional differences recently. Plus rebooting is a long processes breaks my ps/2 mouse support (USB mouse fine) and sometimes my modelM keyboard.
If i run 10 low cpu intensive processess at once (that reguarlly require wakeup many times a second, but chew less than 1% of the cpu) they will starve other processors a lot. I get mouse jerkness when the system is running many processes with 80% cpu usuage or higher. Though the major problem is with mplayer, and mpg123. Renicing seems to have little effect on the schedular. I could renice mpg123 to -19, start up 10 processors that run in the background that operate at nice of 10 and I will still have sound skip (not as much as not nicing processes at all). mpg123 doesn't do buffering ahead as xmms does.
I will say this, the stablity of 2.6.0-testing is very good in regard to uptime. I'm finding it better than 2.4 in some respect.
top - 11:50:58 up 4 days, 17:31, 44 users, load average: 1.27, 1.43, 1.52 Tasks: 197 total, 1 running, 196 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 23.8% us, 3.3% sy, 1.3% ni, 22.8% id, 45.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 3.6% si Mem: 904792k total, 899952k used, 4840k free, 1080k buffers Swap: 1914656k total, 253764k used, 1660892k free, 492360k cached
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 10327 root 15 0 651m 62m 538m S 18.6 7.1 408:38.62 XFree86 31958 andru 0 -19 9412 3732 9048 S 3.3 0.4 0:58.05 mpg123 10404 andru 15 0 46952 23m 15m S 2.3 2.7 19:40.27 gnome-terminal 322 root 15 0 0 0 0 S 0.7 0.0 5:10.32 rpciod 16268 andru 25 10 18492 7084 4736 S 0.7 0.8 6:11.64 btdownloadcurse 16584 andru 25 10 33172 5928 4736 S 0.7 0.7 3:02.38 btdownloadcurse 32274 root 17 0 2212 1096 1868 R 0.7 0.1 0:00.03 top 10384 andru 15 0 11312 5668 9844 S 0.3 0.6 1:37.27 metacity 28693 andru 26 10 18320 7468 4736 S 0.3 0.8 8:16.47 btdownloadcurse 16145 andru 15 0 18628 7060 4736 D 0.3 0.8 3:11.18 btdownloadcurse 16334 andru 30 15 18452 6984 4736 S 0.3 0.8 4:29.09 btdownloadcurse 16420 andru 15 0 26056 7344 4736 S 0.3 0.8 3:41.03 btdownloadcurse 32093 root 15 0 3184 1604 2936 S 0.3 0.2 0:04.48 http
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |