On Wed, 06 Feb 2019 16:34:02 +0100,
Richard Brown wrote:
I was talking to Takashi lately about the saga that is bug 1112824
In that bug a kernel with CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY=y was provided, and
a user reported that it did not improve the situation for them
However, as a heavy GNOME user, in my own testing, I have found the
CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE (as seen in SLE/Leap)
'feels' slower, but is usable without the sort of stalls/hangs/inputs
being dropped that are described in 1112824
CONFIG_PREEMPT (as in Tumbleweed right now)
'feels' faster than _NONE, mostly, but then interactive processes like
many functions in GNOME randomly stall/hang with keyboard entries
being dropped, as described in 1112824. IOW - I can reproduce the
issues reported to a perceptible degree
CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY (as used in 'other distros)
'feels' just as fast as _PREEMPT, without the stalls in GNOME
I can understand the reluctance to change a kernel config option just
because of a bug, and I do understand the argument than this bug
could/should be fixed by GNOME doing less stupid stuff in userspace.
That said, I also think it's important that we should aim for defaults
somewhat defensively - if _PREEMPT can cause such disruption due to
badly written userspace behaviour, but _VOLUNTARY does not, then I
think VOLUNTARY is a better option.
Therefore after this testing I'm convinced that
CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY is a better default for the Tumbleweed
kernel-default than the current CONFIG_PREEMPT
What do you all think?
Since we seem agreeing for this, I opened the bugzilla entry to track
Some of relevant people have been already put to Cc there.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner(a)opensuse.org