tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post819287283668653493..comments2024-03-28T15:50:13.644+11:00Comments on -ck hacking: 3.5-ck1, BFS 424 for linux-3.5ckhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02904761195451530213noreply@blogger.comBlogger117125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-48654934922054604912013-05-10T01:00:25.607+10:002013-05-10T01:00:25.607+10:00After a few days experience:
linux-3.5.2-bfs is t...After a few days experience:<br /><br />linux-3.5.2-bfs is the fastest kernel I ever had!<br />Without any errors nor problems!<br /><br />With previous releases I had to<br />CONFIG_RCU_BOOST_PRIO > default one<br />as a workaround to not get process time overflows with top tool. This error isn't any more!Shakira Watsonhttp://www.cometohack86.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-61866651733924905872012-11-04T23:55:37.575+11:002012-11-04T23:55:37.575+11:00I have tried now both BFS and CFS, with the most p...I have tried now both BFS and CFS, with the most possible low-jitter tweaks. My impression is that on jitter-sensitive applications like Doom 3, they can perform very similar. On additional compatibility layers like wine, who are even more jitter sensitive, BFS jitter-extremes seem higher. Meaning average jitter is lower, but wine has some 1 second jitters, with BFS. CFS has higher average jitter, but no 1 second jitters.<br /><br />Both tested with high_res_timers off, 90hz timer, and a fast granularity setting for a psychovisual jitter-profile of natural.<br /><br />Peace Be With You.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-10540776708508020202012-10-14T11:47:13.118+11:002012-10-14T11:47:13.118+11:00@Micron:
I use the opensource radeon for my graphi...@Micron:<br />I use the opensource radeon for my graphics. When going to a new kernel I often have to reboot at least twice.<br />First reboot may lead to a blank/black/striped screen. But keyboard control is active after 40s. So I usually can login blindly and do the reboot (avoiding disk loss compared to RESET-button).<br /><br />Please also try the new patches from CK,<br /><br />Manuel KrauseAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-38284299520218085332012-10-13T21:56:03.528+11:002012-10-13T21:56:03.528+11:00Hi
No error only black screen after boot loader ....Hi <br />No error only black screen after boot loader .<br /><br />m.Micronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00612104081287508741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-40948824646949474642012-10-13T19:28:25.844+11:002012-10-13T19:28:25.844+11:00Thx Manuel, this is the locks problem I mentioned ...Thx Manuel, this is the locks problem I mentioned above. I wasn't aware you could simply revert (or not apply in the first place) bfs424-grq_urwlocks.patch. Thanks for confirming that.Martinhttp://www.frogge.de/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-13658309133140798892012-10-13T11:42:25.561+11:002012-10-13T11:42:25.561+11:00Please supply more information!
Do you receive err...Please supply more information!<br />Do you receive errors during patch application and/or kernel compilation?<br /><br />And, when booting, do you receive messages you can provide to us?<br /><br />With your posting you're leaving us digging in the dust of Mars.<br /><br />ManuelAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-48696404317930938782012-10-13T11:13:53.839+11:002012-10-13T11:13:53.839+11:00So, I had been running openSUSE kernel 3.6.1 with ...So, I had been running openSUSE kernel 3.6.1 with my old setup (most recent BFS-only from Martin + mm-drop_swap_cache_aggressively.patch + most recent BFQ, UP-system) for over 2 days of uptime without any problems. {Please keep in mind, that the BFS-patch always needs minor adjustments for openSUSE kernel-sources.}<br /><br />Maybe something like that has hit Micron? (I always watch the patching output before make and compilation output before rebooting^^ !)<br /><br />Then, I tested the ck1 provided by Martin and it failed compiling after a few minutes. Error output at the end. I then reverted bfs424-grq_urwlocks.patch from Con's broken-out (http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/3.0/3.5/3.5-ck1/patches/) and it compiled fine and is up and running since this afternoon without issues.<br /><br /><br />Best regards,<br />Manuel Krause<br /><br /><br />Error Output:<br /> CC kernel/sched/bfs.o<br />In file included from kernel/sched/bfs.c:72:0:<br />include/linux/urwlock.h: In function ‘__urw_write_lock’:<br />include/linux/urwlock.h:42:2: error: implicit declaration of function ‘arch_write_lock’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]<br />include/linux/urwlock.h: In function ‘__urw_write_unlock’:<br />include/linux/urwlock.h:48:2: error: implicit declaration of function ‘arch_write_unlock’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]<br />include/linux/urwlock.h: In function ‘__urw_read_lock’:<br />include/linux/urwlock.h:54:2: error: implicit declaration of function ‘arch_read_lock’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]<br />include/linux/urwlock.h: In function ‘__urw_read_unlock’:<br />include/linux/urwlock.h:60:2: error: implicit declaration of function ‘arch_read_unlock’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]<br />cc1: some warnings being treated as errors<br />make[2]: *** [kernel/sched/bfs.o] Error 1<br />make[1]: *** [kernel/sched] Error 2<br />make: *** [kernel] Error 2<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-47784509462361251502012-10-12T23:36:53.801+11:002012-10-12T23:36:53.801+11:00one problem after build kernel 3.6.1 with Martin ...one problem after build kernel 3.6.1 with Martin patch system not boot. after remove patch system boot normal.<br /><br />m.Micronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00612104081287508741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-35554462495291247402012-10-12T06:59:49.872+11:002012-10-12T06:59:49.872+11:00Your download is missing from the link provided. &...Your download is missing from the link provided. "Datei existiert nicht!<br /><br />Diese Datei wurde vom User oder durch eine Abuse-Meldung gelöscht.<br /><br />Tipp: Kredite und mehr!"grayskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16133632514577609343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-14640524847704947232012-10-11T11:37:07.514+11:002012-10-11T11:37:07.514+11:00> @Martin - Both of your patches compiles up ju...> @Martin - Both of your patches compiles up just fine when I build<br />> using a subset of modules; if I build trying to use the official ARCH <br />> config files (linked below), my build errors out:<br />> ...<br /><br />An update. It seems the build errors ONLY occurs when I build having guest virtualization enabled. If I disable it, I can build the _full set_ of modules just fine using the ck1 patch Martin provided.<br /><br />[ ] Processor type and features --->Paravirtualized guest support ---><br /><br />wtf?grayskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16133632514577609343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-36191820495113542362012-10-11T11:01:17.808+11:002012-10-11T11:01:17.808+11:00This comment has been removed by the author.grayskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16133632514577609343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-62522893067161628122012-10-11T10:54:45.237+11:002012-10-11T10:54:45.237+11:00@post-factum - Can you please upload the BFS in yo...@post-factum - Can you please upload the BFS in your patchset broken-out? Did you do this replacement that you suggested?grayskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16133632514577609343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-83474663959035742022012-10-11T08:44:58.930+11:002012-10-11T08:44:58.930+11:00===
kernel/sched/bfs.c: In function ‘update_rq_clo...===<br />kernel/sched/bfs.c: In function ‘update_rq_clock_task’:<br />kernel/sched/bfs.c:2394:2: error: implicit declaration of function ‘static_branch’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]<br />cc1: some warnings being treated as errors<br /> CC [M] crypto/pcbc.o<br />make[2]: *** [kernel/sched/bfs.o] Error 1<br />make[1]: *** [kernel/sched] Error 2<br />make: *** [kernel] Error 2<br />make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....<br />===<br /><br />Please replace static_branch function call with static_key_false function call and have a fun.Oleksandr Natalenkohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12098091624630953604noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-7580002750357781652012-10-11T08:41:56.953+11:002012-10-11T08:41:56.953+11:00> ...did you know that Oleksandr Natalenko merg...> ...did you know that Oleksandr Natalenko merged your unofficial bfs into his linux-pf patchset? Quite an honor :)<br /><br />Guys, stop that. I just merge patches made by other people and *I must* say "thanks" to all of them. Not they to me.Oleksandr Natalenkohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12098091624630953604noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-71778463195098541282012-10-11T07:16:51.246+11:002012-10-11T07:16:51.246+11:00I independently ported 3.5-sched-bfs-424.patch to ...I independently ported 3.5-sched-bfs-424.patch to linux-3.6.1 a few days ago:<br /><br />http://www.file-upload.net/download-6680793/3.6.1-sched-bfs-424-_sid_.patch.bz2.html<br /><br />As always, no guarantees._sid_noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-12612029934017001392012-10-11T05:12:50.301+11:002012-10-11T05:12:50.301+11:00hmmm. unfortunately irq time accounting is a bit o...hmmm. unfortunately irq time accounting is a bit out of my league. I think we need Con's expertise here.Martinhttp://www.frogge.de/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-15490575951070061362012-10-11T05:07:13.256+11:002012-10-11T05:07:13.256+11:00hey grayski,
thx for benchmarking the patch. That...hey grayski,<br /><br />thx for benchmarking the patch. That's a good indication that nothing got horribly broken. Btw, I am still looking for a benchmark measuring the "desktop fluidity" or -- to translate a word invented by German c't magazine -- the "swoopdicity" of a system. At least that's where I feel the benefits of BFS.<br /><br />Thanks also for pointing out O. Natalenko's site. cool stuff. <br /><br />And yes, from my side there is no problem hosting the patches elsewhere. I just used the first file hoster Google would find. It's all in the cloud anyway. ;)Martinhttp://www.frogge.de/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-73724718118984349712012-10-11T04:49:00.742+11:002012-10-11T04:49:00.742+11:00@Martin - Both of your patches compiles up just fi...@Martin - Both of your patches compiles up just fine when I build using a subset of modules; if I build trying to use the official ARCH config files (linked below), my build errors out:<br /><br />http://pastebin.com/xkmcKysu<br /><br />Any advice?<br /><br />https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/tree/trunk/config.x86_64?h=packages/linuxgrayskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16133632514577609343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-53017874257286306482012-10-11T03:25:36.111+11:002012-10-11T03:25:36.111+11:00This comment has been removed by the author.grayskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16133632514577609343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-72379663591067611042012-10-11T02:04:07.061+11:002012-10-11T02:04:07.061+11:00@Martin - Good job with these patches as measured ...@Martin - Good job with these patches as measured by my standard make benchmark comparing identically configured kernels with and without the patchset.<br /><br />http://s19.postimage.org/u12xbrto3/unofficial_patch_comparison.jpg<br /><br />Benchmark details:<br />As you see, the -ck patched kernel clearly differentiates itself from mainline with n=28 runs doing a `make -j8 bzImage` on v3.6.1.<br /><br />Here is a link to my benchmark script:<br />https://github.com/graysky2/bin/blob/master/bench<br /><br />Details:<br />1) It is a non-latency based measure.<br />2) Compilation benchmark using gcc to “make bzImage” for a preconfigured linux 3.6.1 build.<br />3) Runs benchmarks 28 times totally to get a decent number of observations for a statistical comparison. <br />4) Results are how many seconds it took to compile on a 3370K @ 4.5 GHz.<br />5) Make is run with 8 threads (4 physical cores and 4 HT cores).grayskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16133632514577609343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-69583529871714563432012-10-11T00:29:57.917+11:002012-10-11T00:29:57.917+11:00...did you know that Oleksandr Natalenko merged yo......did you know that Oleksandr Natalenko merged your unofficial bfs into his linux-pf patchset? Quite an honor :)<br /><br />http://pf.natalenko.name/grayskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16133632514577609343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-45705538720570120052012-10-11T00:25:33.670+11:002012-10-11T00:25:33.670+11:00@Martin - Thanks for working on the unofficial ck1...@Martin - Thanks for working on the unofficial ck1 and bfs patchsets. Filefactory and captha are lame. I would be glad to mirror your patches on http://repo-ck.com which houses the unofficial Arch Linux-CK packages.<br /><br />http://repo-ck.com/PKG_source/testing/unofficial_patchset_from_martin/patch-3.6-ck1.bz2<br /><br />http://repo-ck.com/PKG_source/testing/unofficial_patchset_from_martin/3.6-sched-bfs-424.patch<br /><br />grayskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16133632514577609343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-18914806142773359612012-10-09T22:57:06.083+11:002012-10-09T22:57:06.083+11:00there is a problem
init/init_task.c:16:8: error: ...there is a problem<br /><br />init/init_task.c:16:8: error: unknown field ‘deadline’ specified in initializer<br />init/init_task.c:16:8: error: unknown field ‘run_list’ specified in initializer<br />init/init_task.c:16:32: error: ‘struct task_struct’ has no member named ‘run_list’<br />init/init_task.c:16:32: error: ‘struct task_struct’ has no member named ‘run_list’<br />init/init_task.c:16:8: error: unknown field ‘time_slice’ specified in initializer<br />make[2]: *** [init/init_task.o] Errore 1<br />make[1]: *** [init] Errore 2Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-55390660215005896992012-10-08T12:46:18.718+11:002012-10-08T12:46:18.718+11:00Thanks for porting the ck patch to 3.6. I'm r...Thanks for porting the ck patch to 3.6. I'm running just fine with it on my quad core machine. Arifhn, I compiled 3.6.1 with patch-3.6-ck1.bz2 using gcc-4.7.2. What's your kernel config look like?tux9656http://tux9656.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6469704299235308349.post-16158943127686763282012-10-08T10:21:06.553+11:002012-10-08T10:21:06.553+11:00Excellent post, Ralph Ulrich. Actually you are the...Excellent post, Ralph Ulrich. Actually you are the first poster in twenty, that actually understand this. Ofcourse on servers many understand this. On desktop, there seems to be few who understand this, and higher hz, and suboptimal configs are much more common there. (for instance 250hz, no preempt, liek a standard ubuntu kernel - mindless.) It seems to be similar people that argue many services/drivers on windows, and tubeamp/vinyl in audio, or similar things.<br /><br />Peace Be With You.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com