Root BSF & CFS Kernels

[m411b]

In case anyone wants to know -

http://www.cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/data/bfs-v-cfs_groves-knockel-schulte.pdf

"The results indicate that CFS outperformed BFS with minimizing turnaround time but that BFS
outperformed CFS for minimizing latency. This indicates that BFS is better for interactive tasks
that block on I/O or user input and that CFS is better for batch processing that is CPU bound.
Many distros like Ubuntu already have separate kernel packages for desktops and servers opti-
mized for those common use cases. To improve the average desktop experience, distros could patch
their kernel to use the BFS scheduler. If desktop users do perform a lot of batch processing, distros
could provide two dierent kernel packages alternatives."

 

[NoRegrets78]

When I was flashing to IR 2.3 yesterday I read up on why the dev used Lou's #8 with CFS instead of the #9 with BFS. It seems CFS is more stable on a wider variety of hardware that can be found in the DINC. I'm not really a Linux guy so I'm not sure why but I thought it was something good to know.