omg! Con Kolivas is back!

keenerd · 2009-10-17 00:16:57

0.304 is considered a stable release.

http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/10/16/96

Also, more of Con's technical yet snarky writing.

Fackamato · 2009-10-27 23:19:04

keenerd wrote:

0.304 is considered a stable release.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/10/16/96
Also, more of Con's technical yet snarky writing.

There's not a lot of people who seem interested in BFS

It did bring out some good things though, a few tweaks to the current in-kernel scheduler etc.

mangus · 2009-10-27 23:38:15

well , BFS 304 is so sweet to me here.. love it!

Fackamato · 2009-10-28 00:41:21

mangus wrote:

well , BFS 304 is so sweet to me here.. love it!

I haven't switched back and forth enough to notice any difference, but I did a simple interbench benchmark: http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=645235

eldragon · 2009-10-28 01:37:05

Fackamato wrote:

There's not a lot of people who seem interested in BFS

hmm within the lkml? certainly.. but the rest of the world seems to like playing youtube videos FS

Anonymo · 2009-10-28 15:05:11

BFS is going to be used by Google for Android.

http://ostebaronen.dk/?p=173
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_Fuck_Scheduler

eldragon · 2009-10-28 16:51:44

another thing to observe is how fast the code stabilized from first release...

i think a nice compromise between the kernel folks and kolivas would be to actually have more than one scheduler in the kernel. and be able to chose at compile or run time. but i dont think this will ever happen. one of the reasons is because they are all a bunch of proud and stubborn folk.

it doesnt matter what benchmarks say, the truth is that the system is more responsive with BFS. i didnt feel any penalty myself. maybe there is.

bangkok_manouel · 2009-12-12 08:57:19

and now......... the -ck patchset ! holy cow, nice day for desktop users ! (using it, works great)
http://users.on.net/~ckolivas/kernel/

knedlyk · 2009-12-12 11:38:05

Wow! Really Kolivas is coming back to the life!

Last edited by knedlyk (2009-12-12 16:33:07)

eldragon · 2009-12-12 14:50:24

do you know what changed besides the bfs?

bangkok_manouel · 2009-12-12 15:19:30

patch list: http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/ … 1/patches/

knedlyk · 2009-12-12 16:33:28

Should we expect new kernel26 with -ck patches in AUR?

eldragon · 2009-12-12 17:09:53

hmm cpu runs a bit hotter with these patches..

its supposeds to oscilate between 50 and 60 degrees when idle..

with the -ck patches, it stays at 60C.

MP2E · 2009-12-12 20:38:58

My PKGBUILD for the -ck series of patches will be posted as soon as I run it for a bit and look for bugs in my packaging. I'm compiling the kernel for testing right now

broch · 2009-12-12 20:42:52

eldragon wrote:

hmm cpu runs a bit hotter with these patches..
its supposeds to oscilate between 50 and 60 degrees when idle..
with the -ck patches, it stays at 60C.

nope, I am using BFS since very beginning and now with ck patches (and CONFIG_HZ=1500) and temp oscilates between 46 - 48C

and this is laptop,

so unless you have something cpu intensive stuff running temp or really bad cooling should not change. AFAIK nobody reported similar problems (and listed patches are known from the times of old -ck patches). If you are certain about this (so no weird kernel config or buggy hardware) maybe email Kolivas.

Last edited by broch (2009-12-12 20:43:17)

knedlyk · 2009-12-12 20:54:13

MP2E wrote:

My PKGBUILD for the -ck series of patches will be posted as soon as I run it for a bit and look for bugs in my packaging. I'm compiling the kernel for testing right now

Good news! Looking forward to your package!

MP2E · 2009-12-13 06:16:50

Welp guys, I have bad news. GCC 4.4.2 segfaults on build(or rather the assembler does upon using 4.4.2) and when I DID get it to compile with gcc-snapshot it caused a kernel panic. I think it might have to do with my config file, however, if anyone could shed any light on this problem, please do.

Also, when I built, the kernel version was showing up as -ck1-ck, but at the very beginning I set sed to remove -ck1 from the patch before applying, I've looked through the patch and I've been making modifications/recompiling all day!

Also, I'm using the default arch kernel config from testing in the ABS tree, and using 1000Hz as the timer frequency, because the patch is supposed to set it to that anyway. Any options I have to set?

EDIT: FIXED!

Last edited by MP2E (2009-12-14 01:05:23)

mangus · 2009-12-13 21:54:31

Holy cow! my beloved x.y.zz-ck kernels are back! what a xmas present!!

MP2E · 2009-12-14 00:08:03

Excellent news! I got it to compile and run! Kernel26-ck works perfectly now, resolved all the issues and running it under my system now.
Here is link to the AUR :
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32877
Have fun! It also includes kernel-firmware and kernel-headers. Make sure to add them to the pkgname if you have issues(the AUR won't let me put more than one package name into one PKGBUILD)

If there are issues perhaps I can split the packages or something... I don't know yet.

milomouse · 2009-12-14 05:12:46

Thanks

ammon · 2009-12-14 12:28:55

MP2E wrote:

Excellent news! I got it to compile and run! Kernel26-ck works perfectly now, resolved all the issues and running it under my system now.
Here is link to the AUR :
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32877
Have fun! It also includes kernel-firmware and kernel-headers. Make sure to add them to the pkgname if you have issues(the AUR won't let me put more than one package name into one PKGBUILD)
If there are issues perhaps I can split the packages or something... I don't know yet.

Will normal nvidia package work with kernel26-ck?

flamelab · 2009-12-14 12:31:50

Yes, it will.

shining · 2009-12-14 12:44:58

flamelab wrote:

Yes, it will.

Hm ? Don't you always have to rebuild kernel modules for different kernel ?

MP2E · 2009-12-14 13:50:55

shining wrote:

flamelab wrote:
Yes, it will.
Hm ? Don't you always have to rebuild kernel modules for different kernel ?

Well, I did anyway. I'm debating whether to put up a nvidia-ck or not, seeing as all it is is a tiny modification to the PKGBUILD in the ABS.

flamelab · 2009-12-14 13:52:11

shining wrote:

flamelab wrote:
Yes, it will.
Hm ? Don't you always have to rebuild kernel modules for different kernel ?

Well, yes. That's what I do. I use the nvidia-all from AUR.

Last edited by flamelab (2009-12-14 13:52:36)

Arch Linux

#176 2009-10-17 00:16:57

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#177 2009-10-27 23:19:04

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#178 2009-10-27 23:38:15

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#179 2009-10-28 00:41:21

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#180 2009-10-28 01:37:05

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#181 2009-10-28 15:05:11

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#182 2009-10-28 16:51:44

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#183 2009-12-12 08:57:19

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#184 2009-12-12 11:38:05

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#185 2009-12-12 14:50:24

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#186 2009-12-12 15:19:30

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#187 2009-12-12 16:33:28

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#188 2009-12-12 17:09:53

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#189 2009-12-12 20:38:58

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#190 2009-12-12 20:42:52

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#191 2009-12-12 20:54:13

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#192 2009-12-13 06:16:50

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#193 2009-12-13 21:54:31

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#194 2009-12-14 00:08:03

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#195 2009-12-14 05:12:46

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#196 2009-12-14 12:28:55

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#197 2009-12-14 12:31:50

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#198 2009-12-14 12:44:58

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#199 2009-12-14 13:50:55

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

#200 2009-12-14 13:52:11

Re: omg! Con Kolivas is back!

Board footer