Thread: BFS for the power kernel
View Single Post
iDont is offline iDont
2011-03-31 , 16:54
Posts: 268 | Thanked: 1,053 times | Joined on May 2010 @ The Netherlands
#139
Originally Posted by hawaii View Post
Started noticing some issues with freezing and bad priority allocating when using BFS. What is this attributed to? I'm guessing the dropping of cgroups? What kernel tunes actually compliment BFS?
Hmm, I haven't noticed any freezing myself. Try to see if there is a spike in CPU usage when you experience a freeze. Also, could you provide an example of the bad priority allocation?

BFS doesn't got much to tune. From the FAQ: "The only tunable for the
scheduler itself is the rr_interval value (see documentation)". The same FAQ states you won't have to tune BFS virtually ever

Originally Posted by Tigerite View Post
You may also try (from Dennis - I haven't tested it yet) the following:
If I may add my reasoning to do that :
BFS doesn't support cgroups and I've read somewhere that some important applications are mlocked by default anyway. Because of this, I don't think the ohmd module has that much effect anymore. I've been running my device without /syspart mounted for a few months already and hadn't experienced any problems.

Originally Posted by Tigerite View Post
Finally there is schedtool, which has been compiled for the N900 (I think it's been posted previously on this thread?), and can be used within a startup script.
Here it is. I'll upload it to the kernel-bfs garage page later so that it'll be easier to find.

Originally Posted by Schriek View Post
And another thing, in Opera 11 when u tap the red O the pop-up is all buggy which wasnt in the original kernel
Some other people in this thread noticed strange behavior using Opera too, see http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...9&postcount=19 and http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...5&postcount=31. Opera seems to be the only application affected though.

Originally Posted by Schriek View Post
My device absolutely didnt feel faster after installing this kernel, maybe ive done something wrong.
Originally Posted by Schriek View Post
uname -a returned 2.6.28-bfs5, so thats ok

Maybe i just expect to much
Using a different CPU scheduler only changes the way CPU time slices are distributed amongst the running processes; in the end your device has still got the same amount of them. When idle, you won't nice much difference with different schedulers as there are plenty of slices to go around anyway. However, at load there are the gains to be found; at least when talking about responsiveness. Try running the kernel for a little longer