Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Abraham Gyorgy <hangcsapda@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 19:09:59
Message-Id: 9eee64bf0805181209k6d96b5eeib3b0637fe19f9d8f@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11 by Alan McKinnon
1 "by selecting a suitable
2 process scheduler and configuring your HZ to 1000"
3
4 It is already done. (the Hz).
5 Well thanks very much for these information (you and other people on this
6 thread). I believe what you say but I believe too what I see with my own
7 eyes. If we will ever meet on a Gentoo conference or anything, I'll show my
8 faster X11 with negative nice level. ;) Anyway I'm running it with default
9 nice level (0) for some days because X11 is very unstable with -15 niceness.
10
11 2008/5/15 Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com>:
12
13 > On Thursday 15 May 2008, Abraham Gyorgy wrote:
14 > > I know X runs always as root. But setting the X server process'
15 > > priority to for example -10 makes graphical software response faster.
16 > > It works for me!! (no matter the system hangs sometimes :).
17 > > I think you have a fast machine, try it with a very slow computer
18 > > (sempron processor and radeon xpress200m+fglrx).
19 >
20 > Please don't top post in this forum.
21 >
22 > Look, you are talking about running the X session as root. That doesn't
23 > make sense as an "X session" is e.g. gnome or kde which runs as the
24 > user. I fail to see how the X client programs have any effect on the
25 > the responsiveness of the server, yet this is exactly what you are
26 > saying. Then you talk about vulnerabilities in the client apps with an
27 > implication that this can somehow affect the server which runs as root.
28 > But that is just not true, except if a client can exploit a
29 > vulnerability in the server (which is to my mind not what you are
30 > saying).
31 >
32 > Finally, there is very little point in debating this topic. If Linus
33 > says that niceness has never had a whole lot of effect in Linux, and
34 > that perceived differences are entirely due to reducing the latency a
35 > specific app experiences, then I am going to go with the one guy that
36 > knows the subject and consider your experiences to be anecdotal.
37 >
38 > You'll probably get better results with X by selecting a suitable
39 > process scheduler and configuring your HZ to 1000
40 >
41 >
42 >
43 >
44 > > 2008/5/14 Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com>:
45 > > > On Wednesday 14 May 2008, Josh Cepek wrote:
46 > > > > > lapitopi gyuszk # snice -15 X
47 > > > >
48 > > > > As already pointed out, running process with a nice value less
49 > > > > than 0 can only be done by root, and it's usually a really bad
50 > > > > idea to run your entire X session as root. X (and applications
51 > > > > running under X) involve a lot of code, and vulnerabilities can
52 > > > > exist in this code.
53 > > >
54 > > > I think you don't know how X runs.
55 > > >
56 > > > X *always* runs as root on Linux so whether you nice it to 19 or
57 > > > -19 is not relevant. It was only very very recently that someone
58 > > > got X to run as a user. Do you disagree or should I elaborate?
59 > > >
60 > > > --
61 > > > Alan McKinnon
62 > > > alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
63 > > >
64 > > > --
65 > > > gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list
66 >
67 >
68 >
69 > --
70 > Alan McKinnon
71 > alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
72 >
73 > --
74 > gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list
75 >
76 >