Re: [ANNOUNCE] BFS CPU scheduler version 0.420 AKA "Smoking" forlinux kernel 3.3.0

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 28/03/12 08:12, Heinz Diehl wrote:
> On 25.03.2012, Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx wrote:
>
> > I'va always wondered what people are using to measure interactivity. Do we have
> > some hard numbers from scheduler traces, or is it a "feels faster"?
>
> I guess it's a "feels faster", because it's the only thing that
> counts. Given that there is strong evidence that scheduler A is
> "faster, more interactive", whatever... than scheduler B, but a
> controlled trial shows a significantly better "feels faster"
> experience using scheduler B, I'm quite shure that people would choose
> scheduler B over A, and that's quite ok. It does what they expect it
> to do, despite evidence which documents the opposite.

CFS: ALSA XRUNs in JACK.
BFS: much less ALSA XRUNs in JACK

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/