New comment by ahesford on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/18940#issuecomment-583905912

Comment:
> I was never able to see much of a difference in responsiveness between `PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY` and `PREEMPT` tbh.
> 
> BTW, the non-x86 kernels are generally configured to use `PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY` (with 250 Hz tick, 100 for aarch64) already. Also when I was configuring the PowerPC kernels, it turned out that using `PREEMPT` results in the kernels not booting at all on a fair amount of machines... that said, I'm not seeing any responsiveness issues on those either.

This seems to argue in favor of switching to PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY. Anecdotally, on a Ryzen 5 3600 six-core (twelve-thread) system, I've seen no unacceptable latency using a custom 5.5.2_2 config that uses PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY and HZ_250 while watching a (software-decoded) 3840x1920@30fps VP9 video (generally burning around 100% CPU) from YouTube and playing a 256 kbps AAC audio stream through cmus while typing this response and doing some mousing around during a 12-thread [cyclictest]( https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/clrkwllms/rt-tests.git) latency benchmark. The *maximum* latency measurements on each core during this testing was, in **micro**sec:

    1189, 1113, 1067, 884, 766, 166, 150, 142, 135, 128, 118, 78

while the average latencies were all 1 or 2 microsec.

Again, this is one anecdote. Everybody will have a unique story.