All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: mobile.parmenides@gmail.com (Parmenides)
To: kernelnewbies@lists.kernelnewbies.org
Subject: Why do processes with higher priority to be allocated more timeslice?
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 10:16:58 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOXENUguxw4Hxd0eh7jjjj1YHB5S52MsjYOqgHorHDu0rkNr-A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)

Hi,

    It seems that Linux's scheduler tends to allocate longer timeslice
for processes with higher priority. Actually, the CFS scheduler which
is a new scheduler in Linux kernel also does the same thing. But, I
think this way does not fit with scheduler's principle.

    The goal chased by a scheduler is low latency and high thoughput.
Normally, a I/O-bound process has higher priority, while a CPU-bound
process has lower priority. So, a I/O-bound process (which has enough
timeslice) can preempt a CPU-bound process easily. This way ensures
lower latency. It is also necessary that CPU-bound processes are to be
allocated longer timeslice to improve throughput owing to less process
switch costs. That means lower priority processes (CPU-bound) should
be allocated longer timeslice, whichs obviously conflicts with the
actual practice taken by the Linux's scheduler. Any explanation?
Thanks.

             reply	other threads:[~2011-09-26  2:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-09-26  2:16 Parmenides [this message]
2011-09-26  7:51 ` Why do processes with higher priority to be allocated more timeslice? Mulyadi Santosa
2011-09-26 17:10   ` Parmenides
2011-09-26 18:40     ` Jeff Donner
2011-09-27  2:07       ` Parmenides
2011-09-27  4:28         ` Mulyadi Santosa
2011-09-27 13:06           ` Parmenides
2011-09-27 15:44             ` Mulyadi Santosa
2011-10-07 15:40               ` Sri Ram Vemulpali

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAOXENUguxw4Hxd0eh7jjjj1YHB5S52MsjYOqgHorHDu0rkNr-A@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=mobile.parmenides@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernelnewbies@lists.kernelnewbies.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.