# can someone suggest a good performance patchset for 2.6?

## gnychis

Hi,

I run the "stock" 2.6 kernel from ftp.kernel.org

I was wondering what good performance boosting patchsets there are for the 2.6 kernel

I have an intel p4 with hyperthreading

Thanks!

George

----------

## mbar

I can only recommend "no-sources" by cheater, but stay away from 2.6.16-rc* series (too unstable now), use 2.6.15-no4. You can find it here:

https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-433849-highlight-.html

----------

## drbenway

Hi.

I would swear by

ck-sources 

- This makes a very good desktop/games system

----------

## bigbob73

 *gnychis wrote:*   

> Hi,
> 
> I run the "stock" 2.6 kernel from ftp.kernel.org
> 
> I was wondering what good performance boosting patchsets there are for the 2.6 kernel
> ...

 

you might give nitro-sources a try, works great here.

----------

## gnychis

i've never successfully gotten ck-sources to work with any kernel i've had, everytime i've tried i get compiling errors and i follow the instructions straight from his site

for instance i just tried again on the 2.6.16-rc4 kernel:

```

  CC      kernel/sched.o

kernel/sched.c: In function `set_load_weight':

kernel/sched.c:698: warning: implicit declaration of function `RR_INTERVAL'

kernel/sched.c: In function `can_migrate_task':

kernel/sched.c:1911: error: structure has no member named `last_ran'

kernel/sched.c: In function `test_ret_isorefractory':

kernel/sched.c:2662: error: `ISO_PERIOD' undeclared (first use in this function)

kernel/sched.c:2662: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once

kernel/sched.c:2662: error: for each function it appears in.)

kernel/sched.c: In function `scheduler_tick':

kernel/sched.c:2702: error: `ISO_PERIOD' undeclared (first use in this function)

kernel/sched.c:2727: error: `NSJIFFY' undeclared (first use in this function)

kernel/sched.c: In function `schedule':

kernel/sched.c:3027: error: `NSJIFFY' undeclared (first use in this function)

kernel/sched.c: In function `init_idle':

kernel/sched.c:4412: error: structure has no member named `sleep_avg'

kernel/sched.c:4413: error: structure has no member named `array'

kernel/sched.c: At top level:

kernel/sched.c:175: warning: 'task_timeslice' defined but not used

make[1]: *** [kernel/sched.o] Error 1

make: *** [kernel] Error 2

```

it says its for 2.6.16 kernel....

maybe i'll give nitro sources a shot too as well as the others

i'm not sure how i could do any kind of performance analysis to determine which is best tho

----------

## bollucks

 *gnychis wrote:*   

> i've never successfully gotten ck-sources to work with any kernel i've had, everytime i've tried i get compiling errors and i follow the instructions straight from his site
> 
> for instance i just tried again on the 2.6.16-rc4 kernel:
> 
> ```
> ...

 

Well as it says you've applied it to the wrong kernel, and almost certainly from the looks of that you ignored the fact that patch generated REJECTS which you cannot do.

----------

## gnychis

 *bollucks wrote:*   

>  *gnychis wrote:*   i've never successfully gotten ck-sources to work with any kernel i've had, everytime i've tried i get compiling errors and i follow the instructions straight from his site
> 
> for instance i just tried again on the 2.6.16-rc4 kernel:
> 
> ```
> ...

 

what kernel is it for?

----------

## bollucks

2.6.16

You said you tried it on 2.6.16-rc4 which is not 2.6.16

----------

## gnychis

bahhh, i see, i thought it would work with any RC

how would you go about analyzing which patch is best for your system?

----------

## jwj

Benchmark interactivity with http://members.optusnet.com.au/ckolivas/interbench/.

----------

## gnychis

awesome, thanks jwj

how do i disable cpu throttling, it says: 

All power saving (cpu throttling,cpu frequency modifications)

i found frequency modifications and they are turned off... i'm not sure where cpu throttling is in the 2.6 kernel

----------

## Dominique_71

Alternatively, you can try the rt-sources at pro audio production applications portage overlay. The kernel is a vanilla kernel with Ingo Molnar's patch and the realtime-lsm module. With the rtirq package you fix the priorities for both the hardware and software. It is very easy to adapt it to another kind of work as audio: just look in /etc/default/realtime and /etc/default/rtirq

It is almost one year at I use such a kerneel, and it is fast and rock solid as long at you don't have any shared hardware irq. You can look at it with 

```
cat /proc/interrupts
```

----------

## tboloo

Slightly OT

AFAIK various kernel patches ads some extra functionality to the linux kernel, but don't expect to gain say 300% performance boost   :Very Happy:  after applying them.

The best thing that you can do is run Con Colivas interbench and check which options in kernel give you best interactivity. I personally use archck sources, becuse they have thing that I need (swsusp2, dsdt override patch & others) while still remaining stable and reliable.

----------

## meulie

 *Dominique_71 wrote:*   

> Alternatively, you can try the rt-sources at pro audio production applications portage overlay. The kernel is a vanilla kernel with Ingo Molnar's patch and the realtime-lsm module. With the rtirq package you fix the priorities for both the hardware and software. It is very easy to adapt it to another kind of work as audio: just look in /etc/default/realtime and /etc/default/rtirq
> 
> It is almost one year at I use such a kerneel, and it is fast and rock solid as long at you don't have any shared hardware irq. You can look at it with 
> 
> ```
> ...

 

Does anyone know whether there's a 2.4-kernel version of rt-sources somewhere?

----------

## Dominique_71

 *meulie wrote:*   

> Does anyone know whether there's a 2.4-kernel version of rt-sources somewhere?

 

It depend what you want to do. For audio work or similar:

Historical

Downloads

For clusters and grid computing:

The lck patchset

----------

## meulie

 *Dominique_71 wrote:*   

>  *meulie wrote:*   Does anyone know whether there's a 2.4-kernel version of rt-sources somewhere? 
> 
> It depend what you want to do. For audio work or similar:
> 
> Historical
> ...

 

I need to build a 2.4-kernel based system that will work with some binary drivers that rely on the RTLinux patches. Will the patches you mention provide the same functionality?

----------

## gimpel

 *meulie wrote:*   

>  *Dominique_71 wrote:*    *meulie wrote:*   Does anyone know whether there's a 2.4-kernel version of rt-sources somewhere? 
> 
> It depend what you want to do. For audio work or similar:
> 
> Historical
> ...

 

the low-latency audio patches differ a lot from the RTLinux kernel.

But you can get an RTLinux 2.4 kernel here:

http://www.rtlinuxfree.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=41&func=selectcat&cat=1

----------

## meulie

Thanks for the link. I checked out that site already, and am a bit stuck on how to implement that non-Gentoo kernel into GNAP...    :Shocked: 

----------

## batistuta

Guys, you've provided a lot of great input, but I think that the point from tboloo, the most important one, has been slightly overseen.

There are a few things you can do to improve performance. If you have a P4 with hyperthreading, you should enable kernel support for HT. That will increase performance. Enable DMA. Get more RAM. Get a faster HD. Then the rest is a trade off between many things.

Con Kolivas patch set (ck-sources) is optimized for desktop. This means that his scheduler gives priority to those tasks that the user is more likely to notice (GUI, audio, etc). It will not be optimal for a server. Other schedulers aim for real-time audio, minimizing latency. Other schedulers optimize background processes so that they don't starve. So the question

 *Quote:*   

> I was wondering what good performance boosting patchsets there are for the 2.6 kernel 

 

is that there is no magic. Windows gives the impresion that it is very responsive because they very quickly come up with a GUI, even if the system keeps initializing in the background for many more seconds.

I've found beyond-sources (based on ck with some other patches) to drastiaclly improve my overall experience, because I'm most sensitive to how fast a window pops up, audio, etc and I don't care if my background tasks run or stop. 

I would personally stay away from too experimental kernels (like no-sources) except for how fun they are. They are really cool to play, but you won't get any considerable performance boost, and you risk stablity (this is not a myth!)

So you have to understand that there is no "magic patchset" that only the linux elite group at the gentoo forums (consultant of upcoming mission impossible 4) know about. If there were such a magic thing, it would have already made it to the linux kernel.

----------

## bollucks

Don't forget that the -ck patchset also comes server tuned in -cks flavour. http://kernel.kolivas.org

----------

## gnychis

I'll have to give beyond-sources a try.  When you download these patchsets, you do a make oldconfig, do you select the defaults?  Like I downloaded ck sources to try out on my laptop, and i just selected the default for everything, like the scheduler and interrupt frequency

----------

## batistuta

I don't mean to be a pain and not answer, but as you can expect, it all depends...

for a responsive desktop, an interrupt freq of about 1000 Hz is good. This means that the kernel will try to preempt tasks of higher priority at this rate. If you are running background processes, this will interrupt too much and might be countereffective.

I use 1000 Hz (I don't recall what the default is).

With respect to the i/o scheduler I use the default one. Basically, with ck or beyond, everything that you choose as default should be the "best" for a desktop system. Take a look the beyond threads in this forum. If you are out of hope, post something there. Iphitus and Tiger (the maintainares of beyond) are two very nice guys that can help with the problems with the patchset.

Are you runnning gentoo? If so, just get the ebuild and avoid the hassle of patching.   :Very Happy: 

----------

## gnychis

thanks for the responses, very helpful

I am running gentoo... but i've had problems with gentoo's sources.  I get core dumps trying to load modules with module unloading support built in.  So I just go with clean kernel sources and patch whatever i actually use.

I will try a different interrupt frequency and see if it makes any difference.  I'm mainly trying this stuff on my 800mhz laptop because its a dog... hoping to improve its responsiveness a little especially in X

----------

## batistuta

Ok... if you want a responsive X system, I suggest to get ck or beyond. ck is directly in portage tree, beyond you have to put it in an overlay tree. But there's no need to get vanilla and patch, both include everything you need.

Then your such system, I'd get fluxbox or xfce rather than KDE or Gnome. They are not as full featured, but less resource hungry and therefore probably more responsive in your old laptop.

In a fast system 1000Hz is a good timer value because it increases responsiveness. In an old system, you might be at the borderline. I'd just try both and see  :Very Happy: 

----------

## Dominique_71

A very good alternative for the wm is xfce4. It is the fatest wm I know, and it is between kde and fluxbox for the features. It is very stable too.

----------

## gnychis

hmmm... i'm already running FVWM, i thought FVWM was extremely light weight... is xfce more light weight?

Thanks!

George

----------

## amdunlock

hi,

i used both. the ck sources and the vanilla sources in version 2.6.16 with xgl. in comparison the vanilla kernel was faster (same config file; same system). i realized this issue while flipping my cube over the corner. with the vanilla sources it runs smooth with the ck sources it is more stagnant. but i have to test the ck sources with a 250hz timer because i had a 1000hz timer compiled in the ck sources.

Greetings, Oliver

----------

## ThomasAdam

 *gnychis wrote:*   

> hmmm... i'm already running FVWM, i thought FVWM was extremely light weight... is xfce more light weight?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> George

 

Ah, this polemical debate comes up again, I see.  What is it you're defining as 'light-weight'?  Unlike XFCE which relies on GTK as its source of eye-candy (which by definition would make it quite a resouce hog -- it's not that bad, but it could be better).  FVWM is written in nothing but Xlib -- it's widget-set agnostic.  This is because unlike XFCE, it's a window manager and not a desktop environment.

-- Thomas Adam

----------

## Dominique_71

 *gnychis wrote:*   

> hmmm... i'm already running FVWM, i thought FVWM was extremely light weight... is xfce more light weight?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> George

 

I don't know, it is a long time ago when I run FVWM. What I can say is at, beside the start time, it is no difference between fluxbox and kde on my machine, but a big difference with xfce (faster and more stable). Xfce have a compatibility with both kde and gnome, but you can disabled it.

----------

