From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932953AbXCMHx1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 03:53:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932899AbXCMHx1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 03:53:27 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:54743 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S932113AbXCMHx0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 03:53:26 -0400 X-Authenticated: #14349625 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19HmFwFmJ5HuKL40sRaRtcMl5GdU8jKV6nuL2wWf5 4IST2rWPTCsjL2 Subject: Re: [PATCH][RSDL-mm 0/7] RSDL cpu scheduler for 2.6.21-rc3-mm2 From: Mike Galbraith To: Con Kolivas Cc: Ingo Molnar , linux kernel mailing list , ck list , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton In-Reply-To: <200703131653.39415.kernel@kolivas.org> References: <200703111457.17624.kernel@kolivas.org> <8cd998d50703121551u44ea3d85g2541503373f461f4@mail.gmail.com> <1173762639.7944.45.camel@Homer.simpson.net> <200703131653.39415.kernel@kolivas.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 08:53:18 +0100 Message-Id: <1173772398.10004.27.camel@Homer.simpson.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 16:53 +1100, Con Kolivas wrote: > On Tuesday 13 March 2007 16:10, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > It's not "offensive" to me, it is a behavioral regression. The > > situation as we speak is that you can run cpu intensive tasks while > > watching eye-candy. With RSDL, you can't, you feel the non-interactive > > load instantly. Doesn't the fact that you're asking me to lower my > > expectations tell you that I just might have a point? > > Yet looking at the mainline scheduler code, nice 5 tasks are also supposed to > get 75% cpu compared to nice 0 tasks, however I cannot seem to get 75% cpu > with a fully cpu bound task in the presence of an interactive task. (One more comment before I go. You can then have the last word this time, promise :) Because the interactivity logic, which was put there to do precisely this, is doing it's job? > To me > that means mainline is not living up to my expectations. What you're saying > is your expectations are based on a false cpu expectation from nice 5. You > can spin it both ways. Talk about spin, you turn an example of the current scheduler working properly into a negative attribute, and attempt to discredit me with it. The floor is yours. No reply will be forthcoming. -Mike