| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
zerojay
Veteran
Joined: 09 Aug 2003
Posts: 1033
|
 Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 5:44 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| After manually patching the kernel sources and compiling, it's working well here too. I used -Os for my kernel cflags. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
MG-Cloud
Apprentice
Joined: 28 Oct 2003
Posts: 200
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 6:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | (for example compiling kernel on background with web surfing/mp3 takes twice the time to complete, heavy disk load gets the machine to its knees...) |
I've also been experiencing these problems. I thought it was just a performance deficiency of Linux as a whole rather than attributing it to love-sources (I just started using linux fulltime in late 2003/early 2004, and love-sources has been my kernel since I've started. I was only using a kernel without nick's scheduler for a short amount of time before). This will be interesting to experiment with (eg the lack of pre-emptable kernels).
However, what's the official word on this (steel? lovechild?)? Is there any reason why perhaps nick's scheduler will interfere with preempt to the point where two things that are supposed to have drastic benefits on a system's performance level can slow it down? Or have I missed earlier posts that say to disable "preemptible kernel" with nick's scheduler?
I'm a little concerned here because the ability to have a preemptible kernel was one of the major aspects that 2.6 was touted for.
Thanks =)
EDIT: Also, I've just recently installed xorg-x11. To renice X, wrapper.c should be changed to launch /usr/X11R6/bin/Xorg instead of /usr/X11R6/bin/XFree86, correct? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ed0n
l33t
Joined: 23 Apr 2003
Posts: 638
Location: Prishtine/Kosove
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 7:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| It works here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MG-Cloud
Apprentice
Joined: 28 Oct 2003
Posts: 200
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 7:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ed0n wrote: | | It works here. |
Hmm... interesting. I may be experiencing something of an isolated case then  Just to see if there's anything in common with the other people who posted problems with preemptible kernels and Nick's scheduler - I'm running an AMD Athlon XP 1800+ (~1.53GHz) with 768mb of pc2100 ddr ram... epox 8kha+ motherboard, msi gf2ti video card (UGH), Maxtor 7200rpm 60gb hard drive, sblive!. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dub.wav
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 09 Apr 2003
Posts: 149
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 7:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here's a bash script I wrote to automatically download the latest love-sources patch. For the ones using ebuilds, it should be easy to extend it to download the ebuild, copy it to $PORTDIR_OVERLAY, and digest it. | Code: | #!/bin/bash
love_url="http://www.public.iastate.edu/~jpcox"
for patchdir in patches ../patches
do
[ -d "$patchdir" ] && cd "$patchdir" && break
done
set -- `wget -q -O - "$love_url/?M=D" \
| grep "HREF" | grep ".bz2" | head -n1`
file=${6/>*/}
file=${file/'HREF='/}
file=${file//\"/}
if [ ! -f "$patchdir/$file" ]
then
wget "$love_url/$file"
echo
echo "$file downloaded."
else
echo "$file already exists."
fi |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pink
Veteran
Joined: 24 Jul 2003
Posts: 1062
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 8:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Everything works for me except vmware, can't compile the module.
Ati compiled in just fine and dandy - Have to go back to love3 as i can't do without vmware (damn you university assignments!).
We do appreciate your work Steel... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VolcomPimp
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 11 Mar 2004
Posts: 135
Location: Newark, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 10:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
just did a stage 1 again and it runs fine until I get to compiling the ATI drivers like everyone else... I tried 1 or 2 of the newest (the ones that
d/l in the rpm) as well as a couple old ones which were from a guide that
I used 2 get 3d acceleration working in the past....
errors on the old ones and the new ones seem to install seemingly fine
until you try and use the module in which its nowhere in sight.
| Quote: | - Added the DRM development tree to -mm kernel. Please Cc
dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net on any bug reports. |
looks to me like an -mm problem... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sindre
Guru
Joined: 01 Nov 2002
Posts: 315
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 12:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I disabled preempt since the loss shouldn't be too big anyway. Preempt doesn't help worst-case latency which is the real issue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zviratko
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 21 Feb 2004
Posts: 106
Location: Prague, Czech Republic
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 12:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I got vmware and ndiswrapper to compile!!
Replaced scripts/Makefile.modpost and /usr/src/linux/Makefile with respective files from -love3 and everything works....
I recommend switching them back if you want to recompile your kernel though  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PrakashP
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2003
Posts: 1249
Location: C.C.A.A., Germania
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
@sindre
Actually it is what preempt is all about: It should make worst case better, though making average and best case a lite bit worse due to overhead. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zviratko
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 21 Feb 2004
Posts: 106
Location: Prague, Czech Republic
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 1:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nope, preempt DOES NOT improve worst case latency - just smoothes all latencies and reduces average |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PrakashP
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2003
Posts: 1249
Location: C.C.A.A., Germania
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 1:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hmm, I thought I read something about this in lkml a month or so ago. But I could be mistaken... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sindre
Guru
Joined: 01 Nov 2002
Posts: 315
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Andrea Arcangeli wrote: | "...keep preempt turned off always, it's useless..."
"...preempt just wastes cpu with tons of branches in fast paths that should take one cycle instead..."
"...Takashi Iwai did lots of research on the preempt vs lowlatency and he found that preempt buys nothing..."
"...infact 2.4-aa has a lower max latency than 2.6 stock with preempt enabled..."
"...Sure, I agree it improves average latency, the problem is that there are nearly no application that cares about average, what matters is the worst case latency only..."
"...PREEMPT=y doesn't and cannot improve the worst case latency. This is true today like it was true 4 years ago..." |
| Adrew Morton wrote: | Preempt is overrated. The infrastructure which it has introduced has been useful for detecting locking bugs.
It has been demonstrated that preempt improves the average latency. But not worst-case, because those paths tend to be under spinlock. |
| Robert Love wrote: | | Yes, the absolute worst case latency probably remains because it tends to occur under lock. |
Quotes taken from this kerneltrap-story.
Beware that there are also comments in favour of preempt which I haven't quoted. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ktech
Guru
Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 340
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 1:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Zviratko wrote: | I got vmware and ndiswrapper to compile!!
Replaced scripts/Makefile.modpost and /usr/src/linux/Makefile with respective files from -love3 and everything works....
I recommend switching them back if you want to recompile your kernel though |
For those of you that cannot compile drivers (ati-drivers, vmware... etc), this solution works.
Only don't forget tu edit Makefile and change love3 to love4 after doing that changes.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PrakashP
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2003
Posts: 1249
Location: C.C.A.A., Germania
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 1:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
@sindre
Ok, you got me then. Well, I'll try kernel without preempt then. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cold_flame
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 23 Jun 2003
Posts: 88
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 1:59 pm Post subject: lirc? |
|
|
| any reason why lirc patch was dropped? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
darkless
n00b
Joined: 01 Jan 2004
Posts: 42
Location: Denmark
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 3:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Zviratko wrote: | I got vmware and ndiswrapper to compile!!
Replaced scripts/Makefile.modpost and /usr/src/linux/Makefile with respective files from -love3 and everything works....
I recommend switching them back if you want to recompile your kernel though |
If everything works for you, then that's great. However, you didn't catch all the related changes.
I made a patch which reverts the relevant patch in -mm4:
http://www.sundebo.dk/dark-sources/reversed-kbuild-external-module-support.patch
_________________
Ignorance should be painful. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zviratko
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 21 Feb 2004
Posts: 106
Location: Prague, Czech Republic
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 3:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| darkless: I did notice there's a patch that actually moves the module to the modpost of kernel make modules_install - that however means that vmware is uninstallable (at least not without modifying the script which is not something an average user is supposed to be doing) - in my opinion, the patch just b0rks a few things - I am suggesting a fix :) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Markus_T
n00b
Joined: 09 Feb 2004
Posts: 49
Location: Berlin
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 6:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Working fine here with:
CONFIG_CFLAGS_STRING="-O3 -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -funswitch-loops"
and gcc 3.4.0  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ktech
Guru
Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 340
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Markus_T wrote: | Working fine here with:
CONFIG_CFLAGS_STRING="-O3 -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -funswitch-loops"
and gcc 3.4.0 |
OFF-Topic, but... how is gcc 3.4 performing in gentoo? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Markus_T
n00b
Joined: 09 Feb 2004
Posts: 49
Location: Berlin
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ktech wrote: | | Markus_T wrote: | Working fine here with:
CONFIG_CFLAGS_STRING="-O3 -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -funswitch-loops"
and gcc 3.4.0 |
OFF-Topic, but... how is gcc 3.4 performing in gentoo? |
AFAICT it is performing well. I'm primarily interested in the new C++ parser, but there are a lot of other improvements too. Visit http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.4/changes.html for further details. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
infirit
l33t
Joined: 11 Jan 2003
Posts: 778
Location: Hoofddorp / The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 10:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Great work on the best kernel for linux
Any change of reiser4 getting in again?
_________________
EASY TO INSTALL = Difficult to install, but instruction manual has pictures.
Join the adopt an unanswered post initiative today |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Evil Dark Archon
Guru
Joined: 21 Dec 2002
Posts: 562
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 10:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
as soon as it is fixed to a point where it can be applied to a kernel version >=2.6.5-rc*-mm* then it will probably be included in -mm and since both love-sources and evil-sources are based on -mm they will both have reiser4 in them.
_________________
This post has been over explained for newb-informing purposes.
Registered Linux user 347334
Abit AV8-3rd eye, AMD Athlon64 3500+ 90nm, ATI Radeon x850 pro |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rfujimoto
Apprentice
Joined: 22 Mar 2004
Posts: 195
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 10:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've been using the mm tree since test3 or so, finally decided to give the love-sources a try.
So far so good, thanks for the work |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jonnii
n00b
Joined: 10 Feb 2004
Posts: 33
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 11:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
worked a treat.
thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Kernel & Hardware
