Ubuntu QA:
BlogBrainstormPackage status
Log in
Ubuntu QA
The Ubuntu community has contributed 21986 ideas, 135057 comments, 2615221 votes
Idea sandbox Idea sandbox
Popular ideas Popular ideas
Ideas in development Ideas in development
Implemented ideas Implemented ideas
Idea #21340: Improve focus / choice for Desktop users performance

bug This idea was marked as being in development the 11 February 10.
Written by chareos the 7 Sep 09 at 07:58. Category: System. Related project: Nothing/Others. Status: In development
Rationale
As you may read around, Con Kolivas is back with a new patch, called BFS, a scheduler or improved response times on dekstop and laptop pc.
Especially on laptop/netbook, this is being tried by users and called to be a good user experience plus.

51
votes
inprogress
Selected solution (#1): Make use of the BFS kernel patch from Con Kolivas -Install by User choice
Written by chareos the 7 Sep 09 at 07:58.
This could be at least an option for users by runtime (software installer) or install time.
-50
votes
inprogress
Selected solution (#2): Make use of the BFS kernel patch from Con Kolivas - Available by default
Written by chareos the 7 Sep 09 at 07:59.
Maybe this BFS-patched kernel may be installed by default along the standard kernel.
178
votes
inprogress
Selected solution (#3): Ubuntu developers to tweak the kernel to support the desktop user
Written by megamanic the 8 Sep 09 at 04:23.
What I´d like is for the Ubuntu development team to pick the best of breed scheduler for desktop users with 1-8 cores (2xquad core). If that means putting in Zen-sources´ plugable scheduler architecture and allowing boot time changes to the schedler so be it.

When you install Ubuntu the installer knows what you´re running on & what you claim to want to use it for (desktop/server) so it should be able to pick a suitable kernel from at most two or three options with different schedulers.

Now teflon coat on. I´m not saying Con´s scheduler should be put into the kernel. What I´m saying is look at the options and pick the best scheduler for the majority Ubuntu use cases rather than supporting pie-in-the-sky one off exotic hardware.
-23
votes
inprogress
Selected solution (#4): have an option
Written by nloewen the 14 Sep 09 at 21:43.
have an option to choose between front end responsiveness, back end performance or a balance (default).
1
votes
inprogress
Selected solution (#5): leave it the way it is
Written by tdomhan the 29 Sep 09 at 19:21.
reasons:
#1 the kernel developers already made changes to the upstream kernel as a reaction to BFS.
#2 the average user doesn't know what a scheduler is.
#3 the average user probably would be confused about an option.
#4 whoever has the knowledge what a scheduler is, is probably also able to compile a custom kernel with BFS

Attachments
No attachments.


Duplicates


Comments
viraptor wrote on the 12 Sep 09 at 10:58
Isn't it a bit early to talk about it? Sure - it's a very nice scheduler and some people may have fun trying it out.
But others report system not booting, filesystem corruptions, etc. Con's patches are not even close to "stable". If anyone still remembers about his patches at the end of this year, it might be a good time to ask that...

Dataphile wrote on the 13 Sep 09 at 20:34
I'm excited to see interest in Desktop responsiveness, and I applaud Con's efforts to provide an alternative to the status quo, which assumes I have better hardware than I do.

That said, Con has explicitly said that he has no plans to support this code, and has acknowledged that it isn't ready for production use. Ubuntu would be wise to get its ducks in a row before committing to support this.

According to the Swap FAQ (link below), the default swappiness setting is 60, but this was virtually unusable on my desktop system. For desktop users interested in responsiveness wins, changing desktop Ubuntu's default to be lower would probably be a much more straightforward solution.

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/SwapFaq#Performance%20tuning%20with%20''swapp iness''


cos wrote on the 13 Sep 09 at 23:19
Of course, our one-to-rule-them-all wonder-scheduler that runs on routers, phones, PCs, servers and supercomputers. Ridiculous!

Con's work is experimental, and is meant to help Linus et al understand that the scheduling needs of a desktop system are very different from those of a server. Desktop Linux is in dire need of a custom scheduler, but it doesn't sound like the kernel team will provide that. Development on that front will probably need to come from the distros and pushed back up into the kernel.

cos wrote on the 13 Sep 09 at 23:22
Oh, of course -- GoogleOS! They might come up with something (don't know if they already have done anything about this with Android that we haven't noticed).

unimatrix wrote on the 16 Sep 09 at 23:06
Desktop responsiveness is the only thing missing in Linux.

+1000 for this

adotei wrote on the 19 Sep 09 at 12:53
Bfs should certainly be looked at. The android developers have started playing around with it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_Fuck_Scheduler

I have recompiled my 2.6.31 kernel with the bfs scheduler and it seems to be more responsive.
I haven't run any scientific test but if anyone has any suggestions, please let me know. Bfs should certainly be looked at.

Djhg2000 wrote on the 23 Sep 09 at 08:10
It would be insane to implement BFS as default at this stage!

Perhaps a check box after initial reboot like this:
"Enable BFS?
Please note while BFS may improve system performance, it will break some applications and/or decrease stability of your system. You can change this option later in the [insert menu here]"

Djhg2000 wrote on the 23 Sep 09 at 23:39
Sorry AndrewLuecke, but I meant we should NOT use BFS unless the user know what he/she is doing. :D

And I agree; prompting after initial boot is a really bad idea.
Seriously, what was I thinking?

Edman274 wrote on the 26 Sep 09 at 18:41
BFS doesn't even improve performance in regular desktops! On multicore systems BFS slows down requests and makes responsiveness *slower*! And I disagree that responsiveness is reduced by a bad scheduler: I've noticed that overall responsiveness is best when video drivers are optimized for the platform they're running on.

tdomhan wrote on the 29 Sep 09 at 19:18
the kernel developers already make changes to the upstream kernel as a reaction to BFS.
the average user doesn't know what a scheduler is. he probably would be confused about an option.

cos wrote on the 9 Oct 09 at 14:34
I agree that optimised video drivers can make more of a difference in the short-term -- most notably, ATI drivers introduce various delays when minimising and maximising windows with compiz, which are very annoying.

That aside, however, in the long run desktop Linux will need a desktop scheduler.


danbhfive wrote on the 8 Feb 10 at 13:54
Hey peeps,
You can follow the work to incorporate the CK patches here:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/424927


Post your comment