linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ian Kumlien <pomac@vapor.com>
To: Daniel Phillips <phillips@arcor.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
Subject: Re: [SHED] Questions.
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 01:03:16 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1062457396.9959.243.camel@big.pomac.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200309011707.20135.phillips@arcor.de>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1985 bytes --]

[Forgot CC to LKML and Robert Love, sorry ]

On Mon, 2003-09-01 at 17:07, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> On Monday 01 September 2003 01:41, Robert Love wrote:
> > Priority inversion is bad, but the priority inversion in this case is
> > intended.  Higher priority tasks cannot starve lower ones.  It is a
> > classic Unix philosophy that 'all tasks make some forward progress'
> 
> So if I have 1000 low priority tasks and one high priority task, all CPU 
> bound, the high priority task gets 0.1% CPU.  This is not the desirable or 
> expected behaviour.

> My conclusion is, the strategy of expiring the whole active array before any 
> expired tasks are allowed to run again is incorrect.  Instead, each active 
> list should be refreshed from the expired list individually.  This does not 
> affect the desirable O(1) scheduling property.  To prevent low priority 
> starvation, the high-to-low scan should be elaborated to skip some runnable, 
> high priority tasks occasionally in a *controlled* way.

I like this idea.
You could handle the priority starvation with a "old process" boost.
(i don't know which would be simpler or if there is something even
simpler out there)

This would ensure that all processes are run sooner or later. Real
cpuhogs would run very seldom due to being starved, but run when they
get the boost. On a loaded system this might be desirable since most
login tools would be "normal" or "high pri" from the get go.
(there might be a problem with locks though)

This should also work hand in hand with timeslice changes imho. Aswell
as process preemption. If we assume that cpu hogs has work that they
want to get done, let em do it for as long as possible. If something
"important" happens, it'll be preempted right?

> IMHO, this minor change will provide a more solid, predictable base for Con 
> and Nick's dynamic priority and dynamic timeslice experiments.

Most definitely.

-- 
Ian Kumlien <pomac@vapor.com>

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2003-09-01 23:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-08-31 10:07 [SHED] Questions Ian Kumlien
2003-08-31 10:17 ` Nick Piggin
2003-08-31 10:24   ` Ian Kumlien
2003-08-31 10:41     ` Nick Piggin
2003-08-31 10:46       ` Nick Piggin
     [not found]       ` <1062326980.9959.65.camel@big.pomac.com>
     [not found]         ` <3F51D4A4.4090501@cyberone.com.au>
2003-08-31 11:08           ` Ian Kumlien
2003-08-31 11:31             ` Nick Piggin
2003-08-31 11:43               ` Ian Kumlien
2003-08-31 18:53 ` Robert Love
2003-08-31 19:31   ` Ian Kumlien
2003-08-31 19:51     ` Robert Love
2003-08-31 22:41       ` Ian Kumlien
2003-08-31 23:41         ` Robert Love
2003-09-01  0:00           ` Ian Kumlien
2003-09-01  2:50             ` Con Kolivas
2003-09-01 15:58               ` Antonio Vargas
2003-09-01 22:19               ` Ian Kumlien
2003-09-01  4:03             ` Robert Love
2003-09-01  5:07               ` Con Kolivas
2003-09-01  5:55                 ` Robert Love
2003-09-01 22:24               ` Ian Kumlien
2003-09-01 14:21             ` Antonio Vargas
2003-09-01 19:36               ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2003-09-01 22:49               ` Ian Kumlien
2003-09-01 15:07           ` Daniel Phillips
2003-09-01 14:16             ` Antonio Vargas
2003-09-01 23:03             ` Ian Kumlien [this message]
2003-09-02  0:04               ` Nick Piggin
2003-09-02  0:23               ` Con Kolivas
2003-09-02 10:25                 ` Ian Kumlien
2003-09-02 11:08                   ` Nick Piggin
2003-09-02 17:22                     ` Ian Kumlien
2003-09-02 23:49                       ` Nick Piggin
2003-09-03 23:02                         ` Ian Kumlien
2003-09-04  1:39                           ` Mike Fedyk
2003-09-02 10:44                 ` Wes Janzen

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=1062457396.9959.243.camel@big.pomac.com \
    --to=pomac@vapor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=phillips@arcor.de \
    --cc=rml@tech9.net \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).