From: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
To: Timothy Miller <tim@techsource.com>
Cc: Timothy Miller <miller@techsource.com>,
William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] O12.2int for interactivity
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 12:29:03 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200308161229.03334.kernel@kolivas.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3F3D23BD.6050608@techsource.com>
On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 04:17, Timothy Miller wrote:
> >All "nice" 0 tasks get the same size timeslice. If their dynamic priority
> > is different (the PRI column in top) they still get the same timeslice.
>
> Why isn't dynamic priority just an extension of static priority? Why do
> you modify only the ordering while leaving the timeslice alone?
Because master engineer Molnar has determined that's the correct way.
> So, tell me if I infer this correctly: If you have a nice 5 and a nice
> 7, but the nice 5 is a cpu hog, while the nice 7 is interactive, then
> the interactivity scheduler can modify their dynamic priorities so that
> the nice 7 is being run before the nice 5. However, despite that, the
> nice 7 still gets a shorter timeslice than tha nice 5.
>
> Have you tried altering this?
Yes, not good with fluctuating timeslices all over the place makes for more
bounce in the algorithm, and the big problem - the cpu intensive applications
get demoted to smaller timeslices and they are the tasks that benefit the
most from larger timeslices (for effective cpu cache usage).
Con
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-08-16 2:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-08-04 19:50 [PATCH] O12.2int for interactivity Charlie Baylis
2003-08-05 2:10 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-05 22:49 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-06 0:12 ` charlie.baylis
2003-08-06 1:23 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-06 22:24 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-11 8:14 ` Rob Landley
2003-08-11 23:49 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-12 0:17 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-12 15:04 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-12 23:32 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-13 15:46 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-14 6:09 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-14 6:59 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-14 7:01 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-14 7:46 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-14 20:03 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-15 16:40 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-14 20:00 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-15 16:38 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-15 18:12 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-17 2:19 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-08-17 18:00 ` Mike Fedyk
2003-08-14 19:57 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-15 16:35 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-15 18:17 ` Timothy Miller
2003-08-16 2:29 ` Con Kolivas [this message]
2003-08-14 19:54 ` Timothy Miller
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-08-03 21:19 Voluspa
2003-08-04 2:34 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-03 10:14 Con Kolivas
2003-08-03 11:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2003-08-03 11:36 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-04 3:06 ` Con Kolivas
2003-08-03 11:37 ` Felipe Alfaro Solana
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=200308161229.03334.kernel@kolivas.org \
--to=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miller@techsource.com \
--cc=tim@techsource.com \
--cc=wli@holomorphy.com \
/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).