What specific benefits have folks seen by turning on the kernel
preemption patch in a 2.4.19 kernel?
We found that a nasty system crash was fixed by turning off preemption.
The crash would happen fairly reliably by switching between virtual
terminals a number of times. It locked up the system hard. So hard that
we can't really find the problem in the kernel; we just found a
work-around basically by trial and error.
We turned on kernel preemption basically because "everyone was doing
it". We haven't noticed any obvious, serious problems or differences
since turning preemption off.
Does anyone have some suggestions about what differences to expect and
what we might have a closer look at?
Also, we are newbies about reporting this kind of crash. Any clues about
where to report it or ask about it?
Thanks for any help... mo
===================================
Michael Ost, Software Architect
Muse Research, Inc.
most(a)museresearch.com
Result looks OK with a SuSE kernel (I think they have lowlatency patch
applied), worst was
ext2 - it was diskread that had most problems...
ext3 - diskread (!?)
diskrm included for reference
http://w1.910.telia.com/~u91005836/index.html
[I have to recheck the results when I am awake :-]
Patches are attached - with extras (see below).
Hmm... the output should really add
kernel version: uname -r
"2.4.21-215-athlon"
Close, but does not tell that it is precompiled by SuSE
X11 server and filesystem type: how to find that automatically?
I use, XFree86 nv
Extras:
* some filehandling (non local root of testing) and
* run with min(SCHED_FIFO)+1 not max
- it is a CPU hog (80%) [the more CPU usage the less prio]
- show that it works to avoid creating a trend...
/RogerL
--
Roger Larsson
Skellefteå
Sweden
