ULE vs. 4BSD in RELENG_7
jroberson at chesapeake.net
Fri Nov 2 12:00:48 PDT 2007
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Josh Carroll wrote:
>> I'm confident that we can improve things. It will probably not make the
>> cut for 7.0 since it will be too disruptive. I'm sure it can be
>> backported before 7.1 when ULE is likely to become the default.
> That sounds great! I figured it was something that would have to wait
> until 7.0 released. I completely understand that.
>> I hope that we can continue to work together to verify any fixes I may
>> come up with.
> Absolutely! Just let me know how I can help. If you need a guinea
> pig...er...tester :) I'll be glad to help!
Could you try spot checking a couple of tests with kern.sched.slice set to
half its present value? 4BSD on average will use half the slice that ULE
will by default.
> Another thing I noticed between ULE and 4BSD is my core temperatures
> seem erratic on ULE. I use RRDtool with the new coretemp(4) feature
> and noticed the temperatures are spiking a lot with ULE, and generally
> slightly higher than when running a 4BSD kernel. I don't know if
> that's significant or not. Just something I noticed when I modified my
> RRD scripts to use coretemp.
> For a side-by-side comparison, see this page:
This is interesting. I have had a couple of laptop users report success
in using lower power saving modes with ULE. Are these core temp
> Thanks again for all your help! Please let me know if/when I can do
> anything else to help out.
> freebsd-performance at freebsd.org mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
More information about the freebsd-performance