2.6.33 / Sabayon / BFS

[Shibblet]

Looks like the BFS is included in the new Sabayon 5.2 kernel. Is this going to make an appearance into Lucid? And if not, is there going to be any way to add it in?

[exploder]

The PCLinuxOS betas also come with the bfs kernel, it's quick!

[juancarlospaco]

This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breadth-first_search) or BTRFS ?

[Shibblet]

This actually. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_****_Scheduler)

And I apologize in advance for anyone who gets offended by the use of language. Con Kolivas named it, not me.

[falconindy]

BFS will never make it into mainline.

[Shibblet]

BFS will never make it into mainline.

I've heard that it's too radical. But Sabayon has adopted it, and apparently PCLinuxOS is working their Beta with it.

Any reason Ubuntu won't use it, or at least have a downloadable Kernel patched with it?

[foxmulder881]

I see no reason why Ubuntu would adopt it. If it did choose to move away from ext4, btrfs would be preference I'd imagine. But even that would only be an install option and not the default choice.

[koleoptero]

This actually. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_****_Scheduler)

And I apologize in advance for anyone who gets offended by the use of language. Con Kolivas named it, not me.

The UF censored the URL :lolflag: http://tiny.cc/neb2w for those that talk about filesystems :P

[falconindy]

I see no reason why Ubuntu would adopt it. If it did choose to move away from ext4, btrfs would be preference I'd imagine. But even that would only be an install option and not the default choice.
Just because it has 'FS' in the acronym does not make it a filesystem. BFS is a deadline CPU scheduler that replaces the kernel's default (fair-queuing, i believe) scheduler. The creator, Con Kolivas, wrote and maintains a patchset dedicated to improving desktop interactivity.

@Shibblet: If I had to guess, I'd say that Ubuntu aims to maintain some level of stability and sanity in their distro in an effort to cater to the widest audience. In line with that, patching the kernel with unsupported code doesn't really seem like the thing to do. BFS doesn't prove to be beneficial for everyone, either.

[Shibblet]

@Shibblet: If I had to guess, I'd say that Ubuntu aims to maintain some level of stability and sanity in their distro in an effort to cater to the widest audience.
Like Microsoft? LOL, J/K


In line with that, patching the kernel with unsupported code doesn't really seem like the thing to do. BFS doesn't prove to be beneficial for everyone, either.
From what I've been reading, BFS is showing 60-90% performance increases.

From what I understand, it's great for people who have 16 or less CPU cores. Which would be Ubuntu's main target audience. This could put Linux back on the top of the pack, for kernel speed.

[phrostbyte]

From what I've been reading, BFS is showing 60-90% performance increases.

What testing methodology that led to this conclusion?

[Shibblet]

What testing methodology that led to this conclusion?

http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/bfs/bfs-faq.txt

[NightwishFan]

I am using Lucid with the CK patchset. I plan on doing some real testing soon, but it seems very responsive. I am running a system update right now and I have had no slow downs. I am really interesting in how Con is championing the desktop performance in Linux. He seems like a cool guy.

The PPA I used is for Lucid, and it contains a CK patch for each main Ubuntu Kernel such as Generic, Preempt, and Server. I am using generic since I am on a laptop and do not need 1000hz tick.

https://launchpad.net/~chogydan/+archive/ppa