From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S271416AbTHKGCy (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2003 02:02:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S271417AbTHKGCy (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2003 02:02:54 -0400 Received: from c210-49-248-224.thoms1.vic.optusnet.com.au ([210.49.248.224]:11654 "EHLO mail.kolivas.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S271416AbTHKGCv (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2003 02:02:51 -0400 From: Con Kolivas To: Martin Schlemmer Subject: Re: [PATCH]O14int Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:08:18 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.3 Cc: linux kernel mailing list References: <200308090149.25688.kernel@kolivas.org> <200308091904.19222.kernel@kolivas.org> <1060580691.13254.7.camel@workshop.saharacpt.lan> In-Reply-To: <1060580691.13254.7.camel@workshop.saharacpt.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200308111608.18241.kernel@kolivas.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 15:44, Martin Schlemmer wrote: > On Sat, 2003-08-09 at 11:04, Con Kolivas wrote: > > On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 01:49, Con Kolivas wrote: > > > More duck tape interactivity tweaks > > > > s/duck/duct > > > > > Wli pointed out an error in the nanosecond to jiffy conversion which > > > may have been causing too easy to migrate tasks on smp (? performance > > > change). > > > > Looks like I broke SMP build with this. Will fix soon; don't bother > > trying this on SMP yet. > > Not to be nasty or such, but all these patches have taken > a very responsive HT box to one that have issues with multiple > make -j10's running and random jerkyness. A UP HT box you mean? That shouldn't be capable of running multiple make -j10s without some noticable effect. Apart from looking impressive, there is no point in having 30 cpu heavy things running with only 1 and a bit processor and the machine being smooth as silk; the cpu heavy things will just be unfairly starved in the interest of appearance (I can do that easily enough). Please give details if there is a specific issue you think I've broken or else I wont know about it. > I am not so sure I for one want changes to the scheduler for > SMP (not UP interactivity ones anyhow). They're not; the improvements should affect fairness on SMP as well and although interactivity is what I'm addressing on the surface, fairness is the real issue. Con.