Page: Previous  1, 2

damentz
Status: Assistant
Joined: 09 Sep 2008
Posts: 1034
Reply Quote
Most likely you're feeling placebo. By entering preempt=full into your boot parameters, you're priming your mind to expect a different behavior and seeing things you otherwise would ignore.

If you believe there is a difference, you'll need to construct a repeatable synthetic test to prove the parameter is changing anything.

As for why restoring CONFIG_PREEMPT_DYNAMIC did anything for you, it's most likely an implementation bug where not using dynamic ends up with some busted code being compiled.
Back to top
mhalano
Status: Interested
Joined: 31 Dec 2022
Posts: 10
Reply Quote
I thought, incorrectly, dynamic preemption and full preemption are different values for a same option. Actually, dynamic preemption is another thing not (very related). Using preempt=full do nothing (it's already using this value), but dynamic preemption do. I will try to execute the kernel 6.1.0-1.3 that hasn't dynamic preemption enabled, and I will check how things going.
I think keep dynamic preemption enabled is valid because the user could change the preemption value to full (the default), voluntary (Ubuntu default) or none (better for servers).
Back to top
mhalano
Status: Interested
Joined: 31 Dec 2022
Posts: 10
Reply Quote
I started with 6.1.0-1.3 and now everything worked fine (Firefox with few tabs and game), but the command you said, `journalctl -k|grep Preem` didn't show anything about the dynamic preemption level (full in that case). I think that is expected, but not desirable.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Page: Previous  1, 2
All times are GMT - 8 Hours