Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Fri, 15 Aug 2003 19:14:05 +0200 | Subject | Re: 2.6.0-test3-mm1 interactivity scheduling mistakes (smp) | From | Helge Hafting <> |
| |
On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 08:08:21PM +0200, Felipe Alfaro Solana wrote: > On Wed, 2003-08-13 at 20:00, Helge Hafting wrote: > > I ran a "nice make -j3 bzImage" on 2.6.9-test3-mm1 in order > > to compile 2.6.0-test3-mm2 on my dual celeron. > > > > While waiting I played cuyo, a lightweight game similiar to tetris. > > > > This mostly behaved as expected, with a responsive game. > > But mozilla (on some other virtual desktop) occationally > > refreshed its page, causing several seconds with jerky response > > in the game. > > > > This is wrong for two reasons: > > 1. There should be enough cpu with two processors, > > one running the game and another the heavy mozilla stuff. > > The make was niced after all. No guessing, I told it explicitly. > > > > 2. The game has very interactive behaviour, it uses 4-10% cpu > > and cause X to use about 20%. Mozilla may have been idle for a > > while, getting "interactive". But it shouldn't remain > > interactive for so long, it sat at 100% till it went > > idle again. > > > > X runs with elevated priority, (std. debian testing setup) > > but that shouldn't matter - X only used 20% and that was > > for the game and two xterms. Mozilla wasn't visible > > at all. > > I can't tell you why, but for me, X behaves horribly if it's not reniced > exactly at +0. In the past, I reniced X at -20, but Con told me that > with O??int patches, X must/should work with no nicing at all. > > Could you please try again with X not reniced? I tried again with X not reniced - and it failed the same way.
Helge Hafting - 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/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |