BFS scheduler, anyone using it??? if so post "howto"...

[tripleninez]

hey everyone,

i've been searching around the forums to see if anyone is currently using or knows how to correctly
compile a kernel using the BFS scheduler instead of CFG...????

apparently it is supposed to be pretty decent, especially for desktops...google has also added it to
it's dev-repo's for Android....

BFS is supposed to be handy for desktop/multimedia, rt-kernels, things like VST, where it out performs CFG.

i am very curious to try it in fedora. however, i have yet to successfully get it to compile correctly in fedora.

if anyone has accomplished this let me know, i could use some help.

although i am not new to linux, i am to fedora....if i was using ubuntu/debian it would be easy...
even in gentoo it is fairly simple to accomplish...but the only custom kernel doc's i have found for
Fedora only apply to using rpm sources, and it doesn't really apply.

i would rather do it from source code and not rpm...

ts9

[tcpip4000]

You can customize the fedora kernel, just follow the instructions in:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/CustomKernel

[tripleninez]

You can customize the fedora kernel, just follow the instructions in:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/CustomKernel


ya, i have checked that out, but compiling BFS in kernel with those instructions didn't work.

jordan

---------- Post added at 07:38 PM CST ---------- Previous post was at 04:00 PM CST ----------

You can customize the fedora kernel, just follow the instructions in:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/CustomKernel

so i gave it another shot, and i am stuck again....

i am sort of disappointed that the documentation has no extra examples and no troubleshooting..
this is where i am stuck:


Patch12013: linux-2.6-rfkill-all.patch
+ case "$patch" in
+ patch -p1 -F1 -s
+ ApplyPatch patch-2.6.32-ck1.patch
+ local patch=patch-2.6.32-ck1.patch
+ shift
+ '[' '!' -f /home/ninez/rpmbuild/SOURCES/patch-2.6.32-ck1.patch ']'
Patch9999: patch-2.6.32-ck1.patch
+ case "$patch" in
+ patch -p1 -F1 -s
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|diff -uNrp kernel-2.6.32.i686.orig/.config kernel-2.6.32.new/.config
|--- kernel-2.6.32.i686.orig/.config 2010-01-31 18:06:59.230482000 -0500
|+++ kernel-2.6.32.new/.config 2010-01-31 18:37:19.739482001 -0500
--------------------------
File to patch:
Skip this patch? [y] n
File to patch:


so what file am i supposed to patch??? i can't find an answer very easily, i have been googling, to no avail!

as a side note: pretty much all other distro's use a "patch command", i forget how it goes,

patch bla bla < bla bla - (i haven't used it in a long time)

it would seem to me, fedora's way of building a custom kernel is far more complicated,
and i do not get why...in suse, ubuntu, etc it is really straight forward and simple...

anyway, any help would be appreciated..

ts9

[tcpip4000]

Could you provide the patch, the patch location, the kernel location and the command you are using to apply the patch.

location: absolute path in your system

[tripleninez]

Could you provide the patch, the patch location, the kernel location and the command you are using to apply the patch.

location: absolute path in your system

patch location: /home/ninez/rpmbuild/SOURCES/patch-2.6.32-ck1.patch

kernel location: /home/ninez/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-2.6.32.new

Command used:

rpmbuild -bb --with baseonly --with firmware --without debuginfo --target=`uname -m` kernel.spec

(as specified in the documentation for having firmware included)

and the patch i am applying is: patch-2.6.32-ck1.patch (BFS scheduler)

the file that is patch-2.6.32-ck1.gz is the original

but i also attached the patch from the ~/SOURCES/ folder too, in case it may be different...

[tcpip4000]

It seems the patch is trying to modify the .config file but the context of the lines trying to modify are not what it expected.

Check patch-2.6.32-ck1.patch and compare the .config modifications with the original .config.

If you understand the differences then create a patch with the diff utility.

Futhermore: I see this patch is trying to modify .config.old and .config~ files who doesn't exists.

[tripleninez]

hey thanks for the advice! sorry i took a bit to respond :)

so i was able to get BFS patched into the k12 kernel. after a few tries, of course.
i needed to do various changes before i got a smooth running kernel again.
your tips helped out. i started the whole process from scratch. i used a diff against the original
and after a bit i got it to compile and work!!

i ended up not noticing a big difference, at least not at first. but i've been busy too... this week, I ended up playing with a "Zen-kernel" and doing some patching to it(not with BFS - it already incudes BFS scheduler) now i am super happy!!!! you always hear people in the gentoo camp talk about better performance with kernels and Zen is an option. Although not officially supported by either party(redhat or Zen) in fedora, the kernel runs really really great.

my system is handling beautifully. navigation feels quicker, there is less idling....and when i am
using VST instruments(WineASIO) they run smoother, this is especially with plugins that produce sound by stream from disk or samples stored in memory.(systhesis has never been an issue).

i was using planet ccrma(still am) and borrowed things from their kernel to tweak my zen-kernel before compiling - also did comparisions, etc. i am blown away, even through Zen is more for gentoo, mage, etc. it's great to see that it works with fedora 12 and seems to give me further optimization and performance!!

one more thing

how do i know things are working better, you may ask??????

when i used to use battery(drum machine) pianissimo(piano) both used samples mostly in memory
but i knew my other piano(boresdorferVST) uses ram(alot) and also reads directly from disk...well it used to crackle and give x-runs now it doesn't do it. it rolls on!!! i use compiz/multiple desktops/etc and everything runs smooth without noticably affecting other processes - which has always been an issue for me....


anyway thanx again and cheerz

i am going to do some benchmarks and post here at the forums!

[tcpip4000]

Hey, good to hear that; certainly you have enough material for a good tutorial or blog.

Hope you pure fun .