On Wed 2019-02-20 01:33:11, L A Walsh wrote:
On 2/10/2019 11:04 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Sat, 2019-02-09 at 15:50 -0800, L A Walsh wrote:
On 2/6/2019 7:34 AM, Richard Brown wrote:
Hi all,
CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE (as seen in SLE/Leap)
Really? the desktop distro Leap uses a config setting intended for servers and that is documented to give unreliable response time for interactive use?
Shrug. Yes, worst case latency is higher than alternative models, but general case latency is fine, as it must must be, else servers couldn't use PREEMPT_NONE to service human interfacing clients. PREEMPT_NONE is just one of three trade-offs, each of the three a mixed bag of strength and weakness.
-Mike
For a desktop user who might like to user their computer interactively and use it to play music or stream a video while they compile the kernel, which would be the recommended kernel model?
As for using PREEMPT-NONE to service humans who in my parents generation used slide rules or an abacus, I'm sure tolerating delays under PREEMPT-NONE is hardly noticeable. But other people have a lower tolerance, to the point that anything over 100ms (full round trip) has people complaining about the slow ping times for a modern PvP game.
This all sounds theoretical. It would be useful to provide some data from a real life scenario. I somehow doubt that playing PvP and compiling kernel at the same time is a common use case. Also I wonder if people noticed any any problems with PREEMPT-NONE before the GNOME bug. Best Regards, Petr -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org