Hi all, I was talking to Takashi lately about the saga that is bug 1112824 http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=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 following results 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? Regards, Richard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org